[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
The vote passes with +1's from Aaron, Adam, Bruno, Andy Files now sync'ing. Andy On 16/01/2020 17:34, Andy Seaborne wrote: Hi, Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 This is the second proposed release candidate. The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can do the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next week. Changes from RC1: Fix for JENA-1817 https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 Changes for 3.14.0: https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira Release Vote Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. Please download and test the proposed release. Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 Proposed dist/ area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ Keys: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS Git commit (browser URL): https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 Git Commit Hash: d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce Git Commit Tag: jena-3.14.0 Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... This vote will be open until at least Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time and we can extend the vote period. Thanks, Andy Checking needed: + are the GPG signatures fine? + are the checksums correct? + is there a source archive? + can the source archive really be built? (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact (both source and binary artifacts)? + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
[x] +1 Approve the release Build passing OK from tag on Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe; 2018-06-18T06:33:14+12:00) Maven home: /opt/apache-maven-3.5.4 Java version: 1.8.0_232, vendor: Private Build, runtime: /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/jre Default locale: en_NZ, platform encoding: UTF-8 OS name: "linux", version: "4.15.0-74-generic", arch: "amd64", family: "unix" Bruno On Friday, 17 January 2020, 6:35:05 am NZDT, Andy Seaborne wrote: Hi, Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 This is the second proposed release candidate. The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can do the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next week. Changes from RC1: Fix for JENA-1817 https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 Changes for 3.14.0: https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira Release Vote Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. Please download and test the proposed release. Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 Proposed dist/ area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ Keys: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS Git commit (browser URL): https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 Git Commit Hash: d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce Git Commit Tag: jena-3.14.0 Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... This vote will be open until at least Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time and we can extend the vote period. Thanks, Andy Checking needed: + are the GPG signatures fine? + are the checksums correct? + is there a source archive? + can the source archive really be built? (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact (both source and binary artifacts)? + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
Re: [] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
Sounds like nothing to worry about (wrt to my NOTICE question). ajs6f > On Jan 17, 2020, at 12:53 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > Thanks for the vote. > > On 17/01/2020 15:58, ajs6f wrote: > >> I did notice: >>> Portions of this software are from Apache Xerces and were originally based >>> on the following: >>> - software copyright (c) 1999, IBM Corporation., http://www.ibm.com. >>> - software copyright (c) 1999, Sun Microsystems., http://www.sun.com. >> I haven't kept track of all of our moves around Xerces and its datatype >> code. Do we still need this, or did we excise all the Xerces-derived stuff? > > Jena has Xerces source code in it. Some of the datatype code was lifted from > Xerces. That's why NOTICE has that text, rather than a binary dependency on > Xerces. > > Nowadays, to avoid a binary dependency, Jena has the source code for all the > datatype machinery under "org.apache.jena.ext.xerces" without the XML parser. > Taken from 2.11.0. > > A binary dependency is a bit problematic using Jena as a library. > xercesImpl.jar has various ServiceLoader files. It will wire itself into the > JVM. > > So the whole application gets Jena's choice of XML parser. Not good. > And there is the recurrent matter of incorrectly repackage/shading jars. > > Extracting the datatype parts (which aren't huge and get called directly from > Jena anyway) and repackaging under "org.apache.jena.ext.xerces" means Jena > uses whatever XML parser the application chooses, including the JDK one > (which is a older fork of Xerces but then modified). No ServiceLoader. Helps > with OSGi as well. JENA-1537 lists a few issues that have come up over the > years. > >Andy > > > > >
Re: [] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
Thanks for the vote. On 17/01/2020 15:58, ajs6f wrote: I did notice: Portions of this software are from Apache Xerces and were originally based on the following: - software copyright (c) 1999, IBM Corporation., http://www.ibm.com. - software copyright (c) 1999, Sun Microsystems., http://www.sun.com. I haven't kept track of all of our moves around Xerces and its datatype code. Do we still need this, or did we excise all the Xerces-derived stuff? Jena has Xerces source code in it. Some of the datatype code was lifted from Xerces. That's why NOTICE has that text, rather than a binary dependency on Xerces. Nowadays, to avoid a binary dependency, Jena has the source code for all the datatype machinery under "org.apache.jena.ext.xerces" without the XML parser. Taken from 2.11.0. A binary dependency is a bit problematic using Jena as a library. xercesImpl.jar has various ServiceLoader files. It will wire itself into the JVM. So the whole application gets Jena's choice of XML parser. Not good. And there is the recurrent matter of incorrectly repackage/shading jars. Extracting the datatype parts (which aren't huge and get called directly from Jena anyway) and repackaging under "org.apache.jena.ext.xerces" means Jena uses whatever XML parser the application chooses, including the JDK one (which is a older fork of Xerces but then modified). No ServiceLoader. Helps with OSGi as well. JENA-1537 lists a few issues that have come up over the years. Andy
Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
+1 binding. > + are the GPG signatures fine? > + are the checksums correct? > + is there a source archive? Yes x 3. > + can the source archive really be built? Yes. > + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact Looks good. I did notice: > Portions of this software are from Apache Xerces and were originally based on > the following: > - software copyright (c) 1999, IBM Corporation., http://www.ibm.com. > - software copyright (c) 1999, Sun Microsystems., http://www.sun.com. I haven't kept track of all of our moves around Xerces and its datatype code. Do we still need this, or did we excise all the Xerces-derived stuff? > + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? Seems to. > + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? > if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? Looks fine. > + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources? Yes. ajs6f > On Jan 16, 2020, at 12:34 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > Hi, > > Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 > This is the second proposed release candidate. > > The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can do > the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next week. > > Changes from RC1: > > Fix for JENA-1817 > https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 > > Changes for 3.14.0: > > https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira > > Release Vote > > Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. > Please download and test the proposed release. > > Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 > > Proposed dist/ area: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ > > Keys: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS > > Git commit (browser URL): > https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 > > Git Commit Hash: > d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce > > Git Commit Tag: > jena-3.14.0 > > Please vote to approve this release: > >[ ] +1 Approve the release >[ ] 0 Don't care >[ ] -1 Don't release, because ... > > This vote will be open until at least > >Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC > > If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work > for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time > and we can extend the vote period. > > Thanks, > > Andy > > Checking needed: > > + are the GPG signatures fine? > + are the checksums correct? > + is there a source archive? > > + can the source archive really be built? > (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) > + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact > (both source and binary artifacts)? > + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? > + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? > if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? > + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
+1 (binding) Checked signatures Github tag matches Built from github tag and source release with both JDK 8 and 11 Checked JDK 11 (module) compatibility Checked OSGi artifacts The fix for JENA-1817 addressed the issue I reported earlier Aaron On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 12:52, Andy Seaborne wrote: > +1 > > Andy > > On 16/01/2020 17:34, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 > > This is the second proposed release candidate. > > > > The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can > > do the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next > week. > > > > Changes from RC1: > > > > Fix for JENA-1817 > > https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 > > > > Changes for 3.14.0: > > > > https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira > > > > Release Vote > > > > Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. > > Please download and test the proposed release. > > > > Staging repository: > >https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 > > > > Proposed dist/ area: > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ > > > > Keys: > >https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS > > > > Git commit (browser URL): > >https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 > > > > Git Commit Hash: > >d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce > > > > Git Commit Tag: > >jena-3.14.0 > > > > Please vote to approve this release: > > > > [ ] +1 Approve the release > > [ ] 0 Don't care > > [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... > > > > This vote will be open until at least > > > > Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC > > > > If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work > > for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time > > and we can extend the vote period. > > > > Thanks, > > > >Andy > > > > Checking needed: > > > > + are the GPG signatures fine? > > + are the checksums correct? > > + is there a source archive? > > > > + can the source archive really be built? > >(NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) > > + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact > >(both source and binary artifacts)? > > + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? > > + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? > > if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? > > + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources? >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
+1 Andy On 16/01/2020 17:34, Andy Seaborne wrote: Hi, Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 This is the second proposed release candidate. The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can do the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next week. Changes from RC1: Fix for JENA-1817 https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 Changes for 3.14.0: https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira Release Vote Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. Please download and test the proposed release. Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 Proposed dist/ area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ Keys: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS Git commit (browser URL): https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 Git Commit Hash: d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce Git Commit Tag: jena-3.14.0 Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... This vote will be open until at least Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time and we can extend the vote period. Thanks, Andy Checking needed: + are the GPG signatures fine? + are the checksums correct? + is there a source archive? + can the source archive really be built? (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact (both source and binary artifacts)? + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
[VOTE] Apache Jena 3.14.0 RC 2
Hi, Here is a vote on the release of Apache Jena 3.14.0 This is the second proposed release candidate. The deadline is only 72hours in case there are enough +1 votes and I can do the final stage on Sunday - otherwise, it is likely to be mid next week. Changes from RC1: Fix for JENA-1817 https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/08ca0b83 Changes for 3.14.0: https://s.apache.org/jena-3.14.0-jira Release Vote Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. Please download and test the proposed release. Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1036 Proposed dist/ area: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ Keys: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS Git commit (browser URL): https://github.com/apache/jena/commit/d0abcd14 Git Commit Hash: d0abcd14f82c36045a3c047941a6518f3bdb56ce Git Commit Tag: jena-3.14.0 Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... This vote will be open until at least Sunday, 19th January 2020 at 18:00 UTC If you expect to check the release but the time limit does not work for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time and we can extend the vote period. Thanks, Andy Checking needed: + are the GPG signatures fine? + are the checksums correct? + is there a source archive? + can the source archive really be built? (NB This requires a "mvn install" first time) + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact (both source and binary artifacts)? + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources?
