Hi Guys, Thanks so much for jumping on this - you beat me to it this morning! I will cancel the IMPC vote, re-spin and push the artifacts, and start over again.
Ellison Anne On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks Tim. > > > > Next Steps to move forward with the Release (for the Release Manager): > > > > 1. Merge PR#80 and PR#79 to codebase. > > > > 2. Respond to general@ that we'll be pushing new artifacts with updated > > ReadMe. > > > > 3. Drop the existing Staging artifacts from Nexus > > > > 4. Rollback the present Release. > > > > 5. Create a new Release Candidate > > > > Since its only a ReadMe change, I don't think we need to go thru Voting > > time and it should suffice to pass the Release once we have the minimum > > required 3 +1s. > > > > meant to say "I don't we need to go thru a 72 hr Voting time" > > > > > For the Release Manager: please read my comments in PR#70 and modify the > > local settings.xml accordingly. It would be a good idea to go thru a > DryRun > > locally first. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Tim Ellison <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> On 25/08/16 01:26, Ellison Anne Williams wrote: > >> > Yes, as per http://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html -- > >> > > >> > The code falls under ECCN 5D002, so we are good there. > >> > > >> > We need to: > >> > > >> > (1) Notify the USG via the sending the specified email > >> > >> Done. I cc:'d the dev list, but it may be stuck in moderation. > >> > >> > (2) Add a README containing the crypto -- Do we have to go through the > >> > entire voting process again internally since we are adding a file to > the > >> > source release? > >> > >> See PR#80. Yep, I'm afraid we will have to re-spin the build :-( > >> > >> Apologies for not thinking of export classification earlier, it is > >> something I have done a few times before too. Please add a line to the > >> Release Guide to consider whether there needs an update the export page. > >> > >> > (3) Edit the export list to add Pirk here > >> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/ -- Who (of our PPMC) has > >> access to > >> > edit the page? I don't think that I do as it says that anyone with > >> 'site-dev > >> > karma' can edit and, as far as I know, I don't have site-dev karma. > >> > >> Done, see http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/ > >> > >> Regards, > >> Tim > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Suneel Marthi < > [email protected] > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Ellison Anne Williams < > >> >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Got it - will take care of it tonight/in the morning and report back > >> to > >> >>> general@incubator > >> >>> > >> >>> I'd better notify the USG of the crypto - lol :) > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> That's the part that had me laughing, all of this source code came > out > >> of > >> >> USG and we are being told to check with USG again. > >> >> > >> >> At the very least we may need to add Pirk to the list of exports - > >> (4), for > >> >> Justin to reverse his -1 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Suneel Marthi < > >> [email protected]> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> Fyi folks > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> >>>> From: Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > >> >>>> Date: Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:48 PM > >> >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Pirk 0.1.0-incubating Release > >> >>>> To: [email protected] > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Hi, > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -1 binding, willing to change my vote if encryption code issue > >> >> clarified. > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: > >> https://repository.apache.org/ > >> >>>> content/ > >> >>>>> repositories/orgapachepirk-1002 > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Please place the artefacts in the correct place [1] That that > >> releases > >> >>> MUST > >> >>>> be placed in the list area and that maven is considered a secondary > >> >>>> channel. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I checked: > >> >>>> - name included incubating > >> >>>> - signature and hashes good > >> >>>> - DISCLAIMER exists > >> >>>> - LICENSE and NOTICE good > >> >>>> - No unexpected binary files in release > >> >>>> - Can compile from source > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I see that the release looks to contains encryption source code [2] > >> >>>> (Paillier) [5], if so has this process been followed? [3] I can't > >> see > >> >>> Prik > >> >>>> listed here [4]. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Just out of interest why the “wideskies” in the class path name? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Thanks, > >> >>>> Justin > >> >>>> > >> >>>> 1. https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pirk/ > >> >>>> 2. ./src/main/java/org/apache/pirk/encryption/ > >> >>>> 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html > >> >>>> 4. http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/ > >> >>>> 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paillier_cryptosystem > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> --------- > >> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > > > >
