Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Thanks for the vote. At this moment there is still one -1 vote made by Sebb, could you please take a look at this release and change it to a +1 or indicate what is still wrong? Thanks! 2012/12/1 Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote: ||| Hi all, ||| ||| I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix! ||| The last few months we have been working on this release. ||| Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required ||| files into the correct place etc. ||| ||| The source release file and signatures can be found on: ||| https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ ||| ||| Before voting please review the section, ||| What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?, at ||| http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release ||| ||| Since this is the first release made by Celix, please do an extensive check, ||| to verify all is correct. If all checks out and looks good, I will call the ||| vote on ||| the general list. ||| ||| Please vote to approve this release: ||| ||| [ ] +1 Approve the release ||| [ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) -1 (binding) based on the RAT check: my cursory run of RAT (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat/index.html) uncovered 61 Unknown Licenses. My concerns have been taken care of for this release. +1 (binding) Thanks, Roman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote: ||| Hi all, ||| ||| I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix! ||| The last few months we have been working on this release. ||| Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required ||| files into the correct place etc. ||| ||| The source release file and signatures can be found on: ||| https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ ||| ||| Before voting please review the section, ||| What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?, at ||| http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release ||| ||| Since this is the first release made by Celix, please do an extensive check, ||| to verify all is correct. If all checks out and looks good, I will call the ||| vote on ||| the general list. ||| ||| Please vote to approve this release: ||| ||| [ ] +1 Approve the release ||| [ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) -1 (binding) based on the RAT check: my cursory run of RAT (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat/index.html) uncovered 61 Unknown Licenses. My concerns have been taken care of for this release. +1 (binding) Thanks, Roman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi, Great. Please make it available in SVN so that I can review. Done. The files in SVN are already a little bit further then the source in the release. So there will probably be some small changes. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1408711 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1408708 -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi, -1 (binding) based on the RAT check: my cursory run of RAT (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat/index.html) uncovered 61 Unknown Licenses. I've taken a look at the reported files. They are all files that either can't or shouldn't have a header, or files that have a different license. All the different licenses are mentioned in the LICENSE file. For the others, some are explicitly mentioned in a NOTE file (eg in cmake/NOTE). Others aren't explicitly mentioned, this mostly involves .MF files which are text files included in the artifacts created by the build. These files can't have a header. Can we somehow accept this status, do the release and make an issue for it for the next release? A NOTE file or something similar can be made to clarify the license of these files. Furthermore, I have created a exclude file for RAT which excludes these files. I still have to add it to SVN though.. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi! On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Furthermore, I have created a exclude file for RAT which excludes these files. I still have to add it to SVN though.. Great. Please make it available in SVN so that I can review. Thanks, Roman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi, Thanks for looking into the release! -1 (binding) based on the RAT check: my cursory run of RAT (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat/index.html) uncovered 61 Unknown Licenses. Here's what I would like to suggest for cutting the new RC: 1. make it easy to run the RAT check by integrating this somehow into your build system and/or provide a script that does that Is RAT a requirement, and do all other projects use it? The release guideline on [1] doesn't mention RAT at all 2. review all of the files that trigger RAT. If you need to exclude some of the files because of the format that doesn't allow comments make sure that the exclusion file is checked into your repo and has comments explaining the decisions for exclusion. I'll take a look into RAT and look at the files missing the info. And here's a couple more nits that make it easier to review: 3. when creating an RC make it clear that this is an RC by putting the artifacts available under the URL that looks something like this: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating-RCX the file themselves should have the final names (without the RC suffix). That way a promotion of the RC to the release is a simple matter of renaming the top level subdir. Renaming a top level dir means a new release to me. We specifically decided to not do a RC. For us it is a release, as the release thread on the Celix list also points out, we all support this. I am all in favor of discussing these items on the Celix list (or maybe een here if more guides/rules are needed). At this moment I don't see this as a blocking issue for the release. 4. when sending an email please include the following information: * a link to the JIRA with release notes (e.g. http://s.apache.org/pY) * the tag in the SCM that is being voted on * url with PGP keys The TAG and link to keys were forgotten, but send later in the same thread. As for a link to a JIRA release notes, we don't use JIRA actively yet. For the future I would prefer to do so. And finally, if you don't have a How To Release document for you project it may be a good idea to create one. Here's a nice example of what it should look like: https://cwiki.apache.org/WHIRR/how-to-release.html Good point the (nearby) future. I'll look into this later on. Overall, as a new committer and the release manager of Celix, I find it really difficult to make a release that suits all personal opinions of the IPMC. The release guideline feels/is incomplete (eg RAT is missing). How am I suposed to make a release which is correct the first time? Don't get me wrong, I do really appreciate all the feedback... [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Thanks for looking into the release! -1 (binding) based on the RAT check: my cursory run of RAT (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat/index.html) uncovered 61 Unknown Licenses. Here's what I would like to suggest for cutting the new RC: 1. make it easy to run the RAT check by integrating this somehow into your build system and/or provide a script that does that Is RAT a requirement, and do all other projects use it? The release guideline on [1] doesn't mention RAT at all RAT is the tool that automates (somewhat) License Audit requirement: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#release-legal-audit Renaming a top level dir means a new release to me. We specifically decided to not do a RC. For us it is a release, as the release thread on the Celix list also points out, we all support this. I am all in favor of discussing these items on the Celix list (or maybe een here if more guides/rules are needed). At this moment I don't see this as a blocking issue for the release. I haven't really seen many incubator projects that would always get the release right 100% all the time. Hence the suggestion of calling RCs out. As I said -- this is mainly to make it easier for others to review your stuff. The easier you make it -- the more ppl. are likely to help with the release process. Overall, as a new committer and the release manager of Celix, I find it really difficult to make a release that suits all personal opinions of the IPMC. The release guideline feels/is incomplete (eg RAT is missing). How am I suposed to make a release which is correct the first time? You're not. That's what incubator and mentors are for -- to let you guys know all the nooks and crannies. Given that -- if you see areas where documentation can be clearer -- don't hesitate to propose ideas/patches. Thanks, Roman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On 29 October 2012 10:23, Marcel Offermans marcel.offerm...@luminis.nl wrote: On Oct 27, 2012, at 17:26 , Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us. I've added the key to mit.edu as well. Concerning the download, I've changed the mime-type but that doesn't seem to help. But since this is only the case when directly downloading from the svn, and not the case when downloading from the actual staging areas later on, I don't thinks this is a blocking problem. I had no problems downloading and verifying the release with wget (and similar issues when trying with Chrome) so I don't think it's a blocking issue with the release, but something infra can hopefully resolve. Can someone please take another look at this? That would be nice, as people know, Celix only has two mentors at the moment (Karl and me) so we really need somebody else to review this release and/or sign up as an extra mentor. Sebb: Can you please check it out again and if all looks good change your vote? The mentioned problems aren't related to the artifact itself, and we do like to get our first release out.. Sebb? Sorry, I've been away. I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release. Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn reviewers about the problen. Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes. The sig is OK. The hashes have an unusual format, which some tools may not be able to understand, but they do agree once this is allowed for. The NOTICE file says Copyright [2012] The Apache Software Foundation The [ and ] are not part of the standard format and should be removed. The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license. Otherwise the contents of the archive looks OK and seems to agree with SVN. Greetings, Marcel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi, I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release. Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn reviewers about the problen. Agreed. Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes. The sig is OK. The hashes have an unusual format, which some tools may not be able to understand, but they do agree once this is allowed for. Whats unusual about their format? I used [1] to generate the hashes. But if for a next release this should be done different I'll know what to do. The NOTICE file says Copyright [2012] The Apache Software Foundation The [ and ] are not part of the standard format and should be removed. The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license. Otherwise the contents of the archive looks OK and seems to agree with SVN. The graffle file is created by me but can be removed from the repository. And the NOTICE file is a small change. Is it ok if this is done in SVN so that we can accept this release? In other words, can we get a +1 on this? Thanks! [1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On Oct 27, 2012, at 17:26 , Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us. I've added the key to mit.edu as well. Concerning the download, I've changed the mime-type but that doesn't seem to help. But since this is only the case when directly downloading from the svn, and not the case when downloading from the actual staging areas later on, I don't thinks this is a blocking problem. I had no problems downloading and verifying the release with wget (and similar issues when trying with Chrome) so I don't think it's a blocking issue with the release, but something infra can hopefully resolve. Can someone please take another look at this? That would be nice, as people know, Celix only has two mentors at the moment (Karl and me) so we really need somebody else to review this release and/or sign up as an extra mentor. Sebb: Can you please check it out again and if all looks good change your vote? The mentioned problems aren't related to the artifact itself, and we do like to get our first release out.. Sebb? Greetings, Marcel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi Sebb, Thanks for your replies, I forgot some of the links, see my remarks inline. Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release? http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/celix/tags/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ Where is the KEYS file? I followed what seemed to be the default schema in the new svn dist structure; https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/KEYS -1 The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers. I've added the key to the pgp keyserver (http://keyserver.pgp.com/) when I created it. Searching via the key shows me the correct entry. Is there any other standard server I should add it? Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes have an unusual format. Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file). As you've found out already, this seems to be an INFRA issue with the SVN server and downloaded artefacts. I hope INFRA can shed some light on this... Does this information give enough information to re-evaluate this release? Thanks again, -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
+1 (non binding) David On Tuesday, 23 October 2012, Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi incubator people, I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix! The last few months we have been working on this release. Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required files into the correct place etc. This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer: * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding) * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding) * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes) See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need one more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a look at this release The source release file and signatures can be found on: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ Before voting please review the section, What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?, at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release Known issues: * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the celix directory, this is actually celix-0.0.1-incubating * The BUILDING file points to http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next release. Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. -- With kind regards, Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On 23 October 2012 13:57, Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi incubator people, I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix! The last few months we have been working on this release. Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required files into the correct place etc. This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer: * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding) * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding) * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes) See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need one more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a look at this release The source release file and signatures can be found on: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release? Where is the KEYS file? -1 The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers. Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes have an unusual format. Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file). Before voting please review the section, What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?, at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release Known issues: * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the celix directory, this is actually celix-0.0.1-incubating * The BUILDING file points to http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next release. Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) See above; the dist artifacts are badly broken. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. -- With kind regards, Alexander Broekhuis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On 23 October 2012 16:43, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 October 2012 13:57, Alexander Broekhuis a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi incubator people, I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix! The last few months we have been working on this release. Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required files into the correct place etc. This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer: * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding) * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding) * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes) See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need one more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a look at this release The source release file and signatures can be found on: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/ Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release? Where is the KEYS file? -1 The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers. Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes have an unusual format. Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file). Before voting please review the section, What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?, at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release Known issues: * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the celix directory, this is actually celix-0.0.1-incubating * The BUILDING file points to http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next release. Please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Approve the release [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) See above; the dist artifacts are badly broken. I've now tried checking out the SVN directory, and the sigs and hashes are OK. There is something wrong when downloading using a browser. I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same (corrupted) file. However Opera is OK. This needs to be resolved before the files can be safely published. Also, the key needs to be uploaded to a public key server. I've not checked the contents of the archive, because I don't know the tag to which it is supposed to correspond. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. -- With kind regards, Alexander Broekhuis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On Tuesday, 2012-10-23, sebb wrote: [...] There is something wrong when downloading using a browser. I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same (corrupted) file. However Opera is OK. Downloaded it with Chrome and the file was compressed with gzip twice. Same thing with the bloodhound 0.2 release, probably some problem with the server, it occurs when requesting with Accept-Encoding: gzip. Regards, Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
On 23 October 2012 18:57, Matthias Friedrich m...@mafr.de wrote: On Tuesday, 2012-10-23, sebb wrote: [...] There is something wrong when downloading using a browser. I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same (corrupted) file. However Opera is OK. Downloaded it with Chrome and the file was compressed with gzip twice. Same thing with the bloodhound 0.2 release, probably some problem with the server, it occurs when requesting with Accept-Encoding: gzip. I think you've found the problem. Just downloaded http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-2.2.23.tar.gz and the headers include: Server: Apache/2.4.1 (Unix) OpenSSL/1.0.0g Content-Length: 7374712 Content-Type: application/x-gzip whereas when downloading https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/httpd/httpd-2.2.23.tar.gz the headers include: Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.16 OpenSSL/1.0.0 DAV/2 SVN/1.6.17 Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-Encoding: gzip Transfer-Encoding: chunked Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Language: en That seems wrong; I'll raise a JIRA issue for INFRA Regards, Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
