I compared the source-release to the tag - they compare OK.

I can build from either the source-release or the tag OK.

I verified the licenses/notices for the aggregate bin and the PEARs are the
"extended" ones that include related licenses and notices from other distributed
parts, and the licenses/notices for the sources and plain Jars having only our
code, are the base ones.

I verified the crypto notice is in the PEAR for tika, and in the full
binary/source aggregate release. In the binary release, it is in
annotator/TikaAnnotator location.

I also did a spot check comparing the 2.3.0 and 2.3.1 releases, and while
there's a lot of differences, nothing unexpected jumped out.

I verified that the PEAR and binary distributions have both the pdf and html
versions of the docs.

[X] +1 OK to release

-Marshall

On 8/24/2011 10:43 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> The 5th Release Candidate for uima-addons is ready for voting. For a list of
> changes,
> see 
> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uima-addons-2.3.1-rc5/issuesFixed/jira-report.html
> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eschor/uima-release-candidates/uima-addons-2.3.1-rc5/issuesFixed/jira-report.html>.
>
> The source / binary aggregate release artifacts are located
> here:http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uima-addons-2.3.1-rc5/
> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eschor/uima-release-candidates/uima-addons-2.3.1-rc5/>
>
> The Maven artifacts are located in the repository.apache.org staging
> repo:https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-064/org/apache/uima/
>
> The SVN tag is
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/addons/tags/uima-addons-2.3.1-rc5/
>
> Please inspect these artifacts, see if you can build from source-release.zip,
> verify the source-release matches the SVN tag (except for small packaging
> deltas) and verify the license/notice files, then
>
> vote
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ] 0   Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not ok to release, because ...
>
> Thanks to Tommaso for his work on the previous 4 RC's !
>
> Marshall Schor
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to