OK, I will cancel and redo RC with the corrected Copyright date both in javadocs and the NOTICE file in jars.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > I haven't found any other issues so I would be inclined to vote to release. > However, because of the now known copyright issue, even though I think > it's a > relatively trivial issue, given that we strive to make legally correct > releases > as one of the important goals of Apache projects, I'd like to see one more > release candidate with this corrected. > > -Marshall > > On 1/21/2014 4:46 PM, Marshall Schor wrote: > > downloaded sources and bin distribution, checked out tag. > > > > Signatures OK on sources and bin distr (didn't check the maven ones). > > > > tag compare to source.zip - OK > > > > build from source (on windows, full build with -Papache-release) - OK - > but I > > note there's this persistent warning about "Multiply defined labels": > > LaTeX Warning: Label `overflow' multiply defined. > > > > Checked the license and notice files in the source and binary > distribution - > > look OK. > > > > The Notice files in the Jars have the wrong copyright date - need to set > > <inceptionYear> (which is not a property, but a top level Maven element > - see > > full discussion about this in other thread). > > > > It would be good if someone can do a quick-start verification test on a > linux > > platform. I'll see what I can do on Windows (I know it's not supported > on that > > platform, but perhaps I won't find any issues :-) ) > > > > -Marshall > > > >
