I think Sandro created the release on Linux, so likely the line endings were \n and not \r\n as they would be in Windows. Also the .jar files won't be exactly the same due to timestamps, and probably subtle JDK differences (such as exact minor release number, etc.). I used WinMerge on Windows with settings to ignore line-ending diffs and "diff -r" on OSX to do my comparisons, which seems to verify that the line endings in the sources files are \n only.
Let's see what Sandro says. You are essentially (without saying so exactly) voting +0 on the release, awaiting further testing. So, I'm fine with extending the vote for another 24 hours in order to complete your testing. Thanks for your efforts so far, ~Roger -----Original Message----- From: Chris Bartlett [mailto:cbartlet...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 3:01 PM To: Pivot Dev Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Pivot 2.0.3 - Round 3 Unfortunately I have not yet finished testing. When attempting to recreate the release candidate from SVN source and then compare the resulting files I am seeing discrepancies which *seem* to just be down to line endings however I have not yet confirmed this or had time to correct my environment (if that is where the difference originates from). What is the next step? Can we simply extend the vote by 24 hours or is a new vote required? Chris On 3 June 2013 22:34, Roger L. Whitcomb <roger.whitc...@actian.com> wrote: > My vote is: > > [+1] Publish > > Tests done: > * System is OSX 10.6.8, JDK 1.6.0_45 (x86_64) > * Download all .zip and .tar.gz files, check MD5 checksums. > * Compare contents of .zip files with contents of .tar.gz files and > verified they are identical. > * Run "clean", "package", "doc", "test" targets on both source > directories. > * Tested .jar files built from source with our application. > * Tested binary .jar files with our application. > * Browsed Javadoc in all four locations (generated from source > directories and from shipped binary files). > * Browsed text RAT reports. > * Compared 2.0.3 tag with current branches/2.0.x code and found only > expected differences. > * Compare both source downloads with contents of tags/2.0.3 and > verified they are identical. > > Also ran a number of other tests on Windows of these same files for > previous vote and found no problems. > > ~Roger Whitcomb >
