Hi, I think having only the source release is fine, since the binary was provided just for convenience.
Good work on fixing all these issues for the new RC, I have no objections for a new vote. Regards, Daniel On 4/6/13 12:31 PM, "Matthieu Morel" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >I integrated comments and addressed problems pointed out in S4 0.6.0 RC3 >and prepared a new release candidate, RC4. > >This release candidate only includes source artifacts, so that we avoid >any licensing issues, because it is the recommended package to use (it >avoids issues with missing dependencies) and because it's not clear to me >how to easily add headers to some of the files gradle is generating. > >Artifacts are available here: >http://people.apache.org/~mmorel/s4-0.6.0-incubating-release-candidate-4/ > >Updates : >- renamed NOTICE.txt into NOTICE >- removed release notes from distribution, but updated tags in that file >for html compliance >- removed gradle from the source distribution >- updated instructions in the documentation for creating the gradle >wrapper since it's not included anymore >- added license headers to all files, including log config and data test >files >- updated KEYS file > >I also took take of previous comments related to a bin release (which we >wouldn't provide): >- listed all non-ASF libraries that use ASL license in the LICENSE file >for a binary release (different from the LICENSE file of a source >release). >- specified version number of dependencies > >... and also updated the .rat-excludes file for minimizing exclusions > > >What do you think of this approach (no binary release)? > > >If there are not objections, I'll propose a new vote on this new release >candidate. > > >Thanks, > >Matthieu > > >
