A minor observation. As a final bit of polish on your very smooth release process, you might consider that when calling the result of the vote, you reply directly to your original [VOTE] e-mail, and amend the subject line start with [RESULT].
So it would look like this, with the original call for votes, everyone's vote, and the final result [VOTE] Release Apache Pirk (incubating) 0.2.0-RC2 as 0.2.0 |_ Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Pirk (incubating) 0.2.0-RC2 as 0.2.0 |_ Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Pirk (incubating) 0.2.0-RC2 as 0.2.0 |_ Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Pirk (incubating) 0.2.0-RC2 as 0.2.0 |_ [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Pirk (incubating) 0.2.0-RC2 as 0.2.0 It's a simple convention that Apache people will recognize and make Pirk look even more professional :-) Regards, Tim On 07/10/16 02:01, Ellison Anne Williams wrote: > Hi Guys, > > The vote passes with five +1 binding votes and no -1 votes. I will now call > a vote on general@. > > Thanks! > > Ellison Anne > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Tim Ellison <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 06/10/16 05:02, Josh Elser wrote: >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> * L&N good >>> * xsums/sigs OK >>> * mvn apache-rat:check passes >>> * can build from source >>> >>> Things to look into for next release: >>> >>> * apache-pirk-0.2.0-incubating.jar appears to have way too many LICENSE >>> entries (the MIT/BSD licensed stuff doesn't appear to be included). >>> Seems like they were meant for the -exe.jar. Probably just >>> maven-jar-plugin being a little over-aggressive :) >> >> Yeah, the license entries in the built apache-pirk-0.2.0-incubating.jar >> come from >> apache-pirk-0.2.0-incubating/src/main/resources/META-INF/ >> bin-license-notice/ >> in the release. >> >> The licenses were placed there to avoid confusion in the source release. >> There are plans for how to address the licenses in the binaries (see >> below). >> >>> Assorted other thoughts: >>> >>> For 0.1.0, I remember that there were some JARs also staged, but it >>> doesn't look like these ever made it to Maven Central. Are there any >>> plans to do this? Not having these JARs in Central may become an >>> impediment to adoption. >> >> You will recall that there were a number of problems in getting the >> licenses and notice files correct for these binary releases; and the >> work to fix it would be "wasted" as the code gets restructured into >> Maven modules which handle the l&n files better. >> >> So for the moment, we agreed to only release the source zip, and delay >> distributing convenience binaries until after the restructuring. DarinJ >> has put forward a proposed rework that is looking good. >> >>> Reminded me of some docs that I pushed earlier this week specifically >>> around this[1]. Having a shaded jars with all the deps is great, as well >>> as just the Pirk codebase. One thing that is good to enable people to do >>> is to create their own shaded artifact with versions of dependencies >>> they want (e.g. Hadoop-2.7.1 instead of 2.7.3). >> >> Yep, the plan is to get there. As you say, the docs look useful for >> those looking to tweak the dependency versions. >> >>> Finally: >>> >>> I'm also super happy to see an 0.2.0 release without a bit of pestering. >>> Great work! :) >> >> +1 >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >>> - Josh >>> >>> [1] http://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/custom_client_artifacts.html >>> >>> Ellison Anne Williams wrote: >>>> Hi Guys, >>>> >>>> This is the vote for the 0.2.0-incubating (source only) release of >> Apache >>>> Pirk (incubating). >>>> >>>> The vote will run for at least 72 hours and will close on Thursday, >>>> October >>>> 6. If it passes, it will be submitted to general@ for Apache Incubator >>>> voting. >>>> >>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: >>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pirk/0.2.0-incubating/ >>>> >>>> >>>> or from the Maven staging repo here: >>>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1006 >>>> >>>> >>>> All JIRAs completed for this release can be viewed here: >>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >>>> projectId=12320320&version=12338108 >>>> >>>> >>>> The artifacts have been signed with key : 1FD8849B >>>> >>>> Please vote accordingly: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.2.0-incubating release >>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.2.0-incubating release >>>> because... >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >> >
