Hi - Svante. > On Mar 29, 2017, at 11:56 AM, Svante Schubert <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I have prepared the RC3 (not voting yet due to some questions left), you > may find updated links at the end of the mail. > > The main changes were > > - using now SHA-512 instead of SHA-1 for Apache distribution
The signatures are still named *.sha1. > - updated the README files of most subprojects > - added Tom to the CHANGES.txt as a mentor > > Aside of this, I have updated our incubator project website > <http://incubator.apache.org/projects/odftoolkit.html> (e.g. the previous > release was not mentioned). Great. > > Before I start a vote, I have got some general release questions I could > not find the answers to on the online documentation: > > 1. There is a DEPENDENCIES file at the root of our release source bundle > (22,5 MB) > > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/odftoolkit/0.6.2-incubating/odftoolkit-0.6.2-incubating-source-release.zip>. > > The DEPENDENCIES file is basically empty, is this meant to be, fix it or > shall remove it? I think that you should remove that file. NOTICE and LICENSE cover any required legal notice. > The comment within states that the file should list the transitive > dependencies (in other words: the dependencies of our project dependencies) > gathered by Maven via the pom. > I would expect the content might be similar to anyone could receive when > calling > ' mvn -f pom.xml dependency:tree' > from our project root directory. And this does the rest. It may be good to include this information on. The polling website with a release. > 2. Does the JAR accessible via Maven have to include NOTICE, README, > DISCLAIMER files as well? I heard gossip, but could not find any > documentation about it. > If so, a pointer to another Maven using incubator project would be > helpful to apply their handling. Disclaimer is required of all Incubator podlings. Readme that is provided is a nice to have and I think it is good, but it should refer to the LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER without including any text. The whole legal directory should be removed as that information is at the top level. I think that the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the subproject are probably OK, but they need to be specific to each sub-project. > 3. Like the BIN and DOC artefacts in a folder and the source and root > level? Is this the way it should be? The question is one of taste. Do you want to have a single jar in future versions or continue with the sub-projects? Really a question for the next release. I am ok with the current structure. I think that the README file should include the version of Java used to build the convenience binary artifacts, but that is not a requirement. > 4. Does anyone have pointers to scripts doing automated Apache > (incubating) release testing? What testing do you mean? Signature? All present? Given the large number of artifacts I would suggest a *nix shell script that uses the find command to locate the artifacts and check hashes and signatures. I doubt that any of the above should be considered a blocker to release by anyone on IPMC. Regards, Dave > > > Updated references for RC3 are: > > Source artefacts: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ > odftoolkit/0.6.2-incubating > > Staged artefacts: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheodftoolkit-1007 > > SVN source: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/tags/o > dftoolkit-0.6.2-incubating > > Issues fixed: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa? > reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+ODFTOOLKIT+AND+fixVersion+% > 3D+0.6.2-incubating+ORDER+BY+status+DESC%2C+priority+DESC&mode=hide > > Release Notes: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/tags/o > dftoolkit-0.6.2-incubating/CHANGES.txt > > The artefacts have been signed using my Apache PGP key 862EA1DEE2EC7D45 being > the last in our KEYS > <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/tags/odftoolkit-0.6.2-incubating/KEYS> > file. > > Best regards, > Svante > ᐧ
