On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Ramkumar R <[email protected]> wrote: >> My comments for RC1..... >> >> Most of the samples and demos that I tested looks good, except for some >> minor changes required as shown below. >> >> INSTALL file - shows a wrong year as May 2008, should be May 2009. >> CHANGES file - would be good if we can consolidate the changes in terms of >> features, instead of listing all the JIRA's >> RELEASE_NOTES file - shows "Apache Tuscany SCA 1.4" instead of 1.5 in the >> overview section. >> README file - shows "Apache Tuscany SCA 1.4 December 2008". >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Please review and vote on RC1 of the SCA 1.5 release. >>> >>> The distribution artifacts, RAT reports, and Maven staging repository >>> are available for review at: >>> http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/1.5-RC1/ >>> >>> The release tag is at: >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/tags/java/sca/1.5/ >>> >>> +1 from me. >>> >>> ...ant >> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks & Regards, >> Ramkumar Ramalingam >> > > Hi > > Rat looks good > Legal looks good > I tried a few samples successfully > I tried the alert aggregator demo and that failed - I'd be prepared to > let that go and fix it next time round > I tried the tutorial successfully > I built the samples from the 1.5RC1 repo successfully > I built the source distro (not from a clean local repo though) successfully > I installed the update site. It's marked with v1.4 and doesn't work > I recognize the issues that Ram pointed out with the READMEs etc. > > Can we drop the update site or 1.5? I don't know enough about it to > predict what is wrong with it > I think the version errors in READMEs etc make the release look sloppy > > I guess we have to respin to fix these two points? I'm +0. > > Simon >
I've fixed the eclipse update site in r779493 and it works for me now, and fixed the doc files text in r779226. I still think its worth releasing this RC1 as 1.5 and fixing those in a 1.5.1 release in a week or so to give time to find any other issues that may be in 1.5, so i'm still +1 on this vote (i've pulled the updatesite from the RC1 artifacts so it wouldn't be releasing the eclipse plugin). The doc file typos are pretty minor, eg the RELEASE_NOTES one the heading is correct its just a mention in the text body, and no one noticed these during all the RC0 reviews. With a respin we'd not make a release this month and we've promised to do that so i think its better to get this out and show users that they can rely on what we say. As we'd not make a respin this month anyway I'll leave this vote open for now hoping for a couple more +1s. So please, consider (re)voting :) ...ant
