Hi Ant, I agree with you, +1 from me.
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:45 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > 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/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/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 > -- Thanks & Regards, Ramkumar Ramalingam
