The vote passes with 3 +1 votes and no other votes received:

+1 votes received from:
 - Marshall Schor
 - Jaroslaw Cwiklik
 - Burn Lewis

No other votes were received.

Thanks to all for taking the time to vote on the UIMA-AS release.

I will promote UIMA-AS artifacts to the Central Repo.


On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Burn Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:

> Also checked LICENSE & NOTICE in binary distribution and after the build
> from source.
>
> [ ] +1 Still approve the release
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Burn Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Checked source & binary signatures
> > Built from source
> > Built DUCC against that build
> > Installed DUCC and ran multiple UIMA-AS jobs using an http application
> > broker
> >
> > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Built from source - OK
> >> Spot checked signatures - OK
> >> Spot checked LICENSE and NOTICE - OK
> >> Checked UIMA-AS API formatting - OK
> >> Installed Deployment Editor in eclipse - OK
> >> Tested sending CASes to a service using HTTP and TCP - OK
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> >>
> >> Jerry
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > signatures OK
> >> > compare source-release with SVN -OK
> >> > eclipse plugin install - OK (in Eclipse 4.3.2)
> >> > build from sources after clearing local repo of uima-as artifacts: OK
> >> >
> >> > run extended tests:  bumpy but ok eventually.   I was running from
> >> Eclipse
> >> > and
> >> > my Eclipse doesn't quite do the right thing on building - it misses
> out
> >> > generating some xmlbean things (but build from command line with mvn
> >> > works).
> >> >
> >> > Also found a wrong version of Java compiler source / target in the
> poms,
> >> > need to
> >> > upgrade to parent-pom 10 (when that's released) and/or override in the
> >> > meanwhile.  This doesn't seem to have affect the build, when built
> with
> >> a
> >> > Java 7
> >> > JVM (which the Manifests indicate the binary build artifacts were
> built
> >> > with) -
> >> > the tests and extended tests both ran fine.  So I don't consider this
> a
> >> > blocker.
> >> >
> >> > issues fixed - OK
> >> >
> >> > Spot check many licenses & notices in Jars in the binary release
> >> > (especially the
> >> > new ones), and one in the Maven Artifacts in the staging repo: OK.
> >> >
> >> > check main license / notice in source and bin - OK
> >> >
> >> > Readme says "tested with Sun Java 6 on Windows XP"  - probably needs
> >> > updating?
> >> > I think we mainly test with Java 7 and on Windows we use Windows 7 (or
> >> 8),
> >> > not
> >> > XP...   I don't consider this a release blocker.
> >> >
> >> > Did the quickstart in the Readme - OK.
> >> >
> >> > [x] +1 OK to release.
> >> >
> >> > -Marshall Schor
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to