Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Tommaso Teofili]

hi all,

I've uploaded the artifacts from the nexus staging repo to /dist/dev; those
should be the good ones, so that we can proceed and get the IMPC voting
happen.

Regards,
Tommaso


Il giorno dom 23 apr 2017 alle ore 09:47 Henry Saputra <
henry.sapu...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> So is the RC4 still be the release candidate for v6.1 or need to wait for
> new hash checksum files to be updated?
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:34 PM, lewis john mcgibbney 
> wrote:
>
> > PING Tommaso.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:32 AM, lewis john mcgibbney <
> lewi...@apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Tommaso,
> > >
> > > Go for it. Let's get some more feedback and then we can take it to the
> > > IPMC if the VOTE passes here.
> > > Lewis
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:46 AM,  > > incubator.apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> thanks a lot Lewis for your in depth analysis which makes things
> clearer
> > >> now.
> > >> I can find the mentioned (wrong) binary files in the source packages
> on
> > >> dist/dev [1] while I can't find them within the ones on the staging
> repo
> > >> [2].
> > >> So if I can copy the ones from the staging repo to dis/dev that should
> > be
> > >> ok, perhaps that's what I would have had to do in first place.
> > >>
> > >> What do you think ?
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Tommaso
> > >>
> > >> [1] : https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/
> > >> [2] :
> > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> > >> joshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua-incubating/6.1/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://home.apache.org/~lewismc/
> > @hectorMcSpector
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/lmcgibbney
> >
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Henry Saputra]

So is the RC4 still be the release candidate for v6.1 or need to wait for
new hash checksum files to be updated?

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:34 PM, lewis john mcgibbney 
wrote:

> PING Tommaso.
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:32 AM, lewis john mcgibbney  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tommaso,
> >
> > Go for it. Let's get some more feedback and then we can take it to the
> > IPMC if the VOTE passes here.
> > Lewis
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:46 AM,  > incubator.apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> thanks a lot Lewis for your in depth analysis which makes things clearer
> >> now.
> >> I can find the mentioned (wrong) binary files in the source packages on
> >> dist/dev [1] while I can't find them within the ones on the staging repo
> >> [2].
> >> So if I can copy the ones from the staging repo to dis/dev that should
> be
> >> ok, perhaps that's what I would have had to do in first place.
> >>
> >> What do you think ?
> >> Regards,
> >> Tommaso
> >>
> >> [1] : https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/
> >> [2] :
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> >> joshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua-incubating/6.1/
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> --
> http://home.apache.org/~lewismc/
> @hectorMcSpector
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/lmcgibbney
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[lewis john mcgibbney]

Hi Tommaso,

Go for it. Let's get some more feedback and then we can take it to the IPMC
if the VOTE passes here.
Lewis

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:46 AM, <
dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:

>
> thanks a lot Lewis for your in depth analysis which makes things clearer
> now.
> I can find the mentioned (wrong) binary files in the source packages on
> dist/dev [1] while I can't find them within the ones on the staging repo
> [2].
> So if I can copy the ones from the staging repo to dis/dev that should be
> ok, perhaps that's what I would have had to do in first place.
>
> What do you think ?
> Regards,
> Tommaso
>
> [1] : https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/
> [2] :
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachejoshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua-incubating/6.1/
>
>
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Tommaso Teofili]

Hi Lewis,

Il giorno ven 7 apr 2017 alle ore 18:19 lewis john mcgibbney <
lewi...@apache.org> ha scritto:

> Hi Tomasso,
>
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:31 AM, <
> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org
> > wrote:
>
> >
> > From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Bcc:
> > Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 17:06:06 +
> > Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
> > I really have no idea, I just executed the Maven commands as per wiki
> [1],
> > then I found out that in my /target directory I had all the expected
> > artifacts but no md5 / sha1 signatures for them, on the other hand it
> seems
> > they got generated at some point and existed in the staging repo on
> Nexus.
> >
>
> This seems strange, I just used a very similar release procedure on another
> project (Gora) and we were able to provide all signatures with staging and
> repository artifacts being the same. It should be noted however that the
> release policy [0] does not explicitly mention which type of cryptographic
> signature method be used, only that "...All supplied packages MUST be
> cryptographically signed by the Release Manager with a detached signature."
>
> [0] http://apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-signing
>
> In my opinion, if one method of signature is provided (which it is) then
> that satisfies the release policy. The mismatch does however raise
> questions as to whether the staging and repository artifacts are the same.
> I thought I would check it out, here are my results.
>
> I calculated an md5 checksum for the staging -src.tar.gz artifact and then
> repository artifact as follows
>
> gpg --print-md MD5 joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz >
> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5
> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz: 9A 13 8A E8 F6 A3 12 8C  64 77 9B 29 18
> FD 86
>   48
>
> gpg --print-md MD5 joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz >
> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5
> joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz: 16 75 A7 A9 B0 D7 DF 56  61 06 52 FA C9
> 12 D2
>   6F
>
> I then undertook a manual diff of the directories
>
> diff -r apache-joshua-6.1-incubating ./maven/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating |
> grep apache-joshua-6.1-incubating | awk '{print $4}' > difference1.txt
>
> difference1.txt contained the following entries
>
> build_binary
> lmplz
> query
> sentclient
> sentclient.dSYM
> sentserver
> sentserver.dSYM
>
> These files can be found at the following locations
>
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "build_binary"
> ./bin/build_binary
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "lmplz"
> ./bin/lmplz
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "query"
> ./bin/query
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "sentclient"
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient
>
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient.dSYM/Contents/Resources/DWARF/sentclient
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "sentclient.dSYM"
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient.dSYM
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "sentserver"
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver
>
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver.dSYM/Contents/Resources/DWARF/sentserver
> lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 <0564%2030> ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $
> find . -name
> "sentserver.dSYM"
> ./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver.dSYM
>
> These are binary files and should not be included within the release
> candidate.
>
>
>
> > Having realized that I manually created the md5 counterparts for source
> > distribution packages and uploaded both artifacts and md5 signatures to
> > /dist.
> >
> > I am not sure myself if this is a somewhat ok or expected behaviour (it's
> > one of my first times as a release manager).
> >
> > I guess we could simply put the stuff from Nexus on /dist/dev instead, as
> > that will anyway be the one that goes in /dist/release once we release
> the
> > staging repo, WDYT?
> >
> >
> It is therefore my opinion that you replace the staging artifacts with the
> artifacts present within repository... or DROP the release candidate and
> push another one.
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[lewis john mcgibbney]

Hi Tomasso,

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:31 AM, <dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org
> wrote:

>
> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 17:06:06 +0000
> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
> I really have no idea, I just executed the Maven commands as per wiki [1],
> then I found out that in my /target directory I had all the expected
> artifacts but no md5 / sha1 signatures for them, on the other hand it seems
> they got generated at some point and existed in the staging repo on Nexus.
>

This seems strange, I just used a very similar release procedure on another
project (Gora) and we were able to provide all signatures with staging and
repository artifacts being the same. It should be noted however that the
release policy [0] does not explicitly mention which type of cryptographic
signature method be used, only that "...All supplied packages MUST be
cryptographically signed by the Release Manager with a detached signature."

[0] http://apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-signing

In my opinion, if one method of signature is provided (which it is) then
that satisfies the release policy. The mismatch does however raise
questions as to whether the staging and repository artifacts are the same.
I thought I would check it out, here are my results.

I calculated an md5 checksum for the staging -src.tar.gz artifact and then
repository artifact as follows

gpg --print-md MD5 joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz >
joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5
joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz: 9A 13 8A E8 F6 A3 12 8C  64 77 9B 29 18
FD 86
  48

gpg --print-md MD5 joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz >
joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5
joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz: 16 75 A7 A9 B0 D7 DF 56  61 06 52 FA C9
12 D2
  6F

I then undertook a manual diff of the directories

diff -r apache-joshua-6.1-incubating ./maven/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating |
grep apache-joshua-6.1-incubating | awk '{print $4}' > difference1.txt

difference1.txt contained the following entries

build_binary
lmplz
query
sentclient
sentclient.dSYM
sentserver
sentserver.dSYM

These files can be found at the following locations

lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"build_binary"
./bin/build_binary
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"lmplz"
./bin/lmplz
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"query"
./bin/query
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"sentclient"
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient.dSYM/Contents/Resources/DWARF/sentclient
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"sentclient.dSYM"
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentclient.dSYM
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"sentserver"
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver.dSYM/Contents/Resources/DWARF/sentserver
lmcgibbn@LMC-056430 ~/Desktop/apache-joshua-6.1-incubating $ find . -name
"sentserver.dSYM"
./scripts/training/parallelize/sentserver.dSYM

These are binary files and should not be included within the release
candidate.



> Having realized that I manually created the md5 counterparts for source
> distribution packages and uploaded both artifacts and md5 signatures to
> /dist.
>
> I am not sure myself if this is a somewhat ok or expected behaviour (it's
> one of my first times as a release manager).
>
> I guess we could simply put the stuff from Nexus on /dist/dev instead, as
> that will anyway be the one that goes in /dist/release once we release the
> staging repo, WDYT?
>
>
It is therefore my opinion that you replace the staging artifacts with the
artifacts present within repository... or DROP the release candidate and
push another one.
Lewis

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Tommaso Teofili]

I really have no idea, I just executed the Maven commands as per wiki [1],
then I found out that in my /target directory I had all the expected
artifacts but no md5 / sha1 signatures for them, on the other hand it seems
they got generated at some point and existed in the staging repo on Nexus.
Having realized that I manually created the md5 counterparts for source
distribution packages and uploaded both artifacts and md5 signatures to
/dist.

I am not sure myself if this is a somewhat ok or expected behaviour (it's
one of my first times as a release manager).

I guess we could simply put the stuff from Nexus on /dist/dev instead, as
that will anyway be the one that goes in /dist/release once we release the
staging repo, WDYT?

Regards,
Tommaso

[1] :
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/JOSHUA/Joshua+Release+Management+Procedure#JoshuaReleaseManagementProcedure-Preparingareleasecandidate%28RC%29forcommunityVOTE%27ing


Il giorno ven 31 mar 2017 alle ore 21:24 Matt Post <p...@cs.jhu.edu> ha
scritto:

Yes, I've verified that those don't match, either.

I can't think of a reason that they *shouldn't* match. Tommaso, do you have
any idea why they're different? Are these two locations out of sync?



> On Mar 29, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Michael A. Hedderich <
m...@michael-hedderich.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> from my last mail:
>
> "What does not match for me are the md5 or sha1 of the stagging repo with
> those of the source release artifacts. E.g. https://repository.apache.org/
> content/repositories/orgapachejoshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua
> -incubating/6.1/joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5 vs
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/joshua
> -incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5  "
>
> If this is the expected behavior, then its a +1 from me, too.
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
>
> 2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
>> possible.
>> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
>> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
>> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
>> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>>
>> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>>
>> To clarify, I'm a +1
>>
>> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
>> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
>>> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
>>> ping
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> 2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
>> possible.
>> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
>> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
>> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
>> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>>
>> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>>
>> To clarify, I'm a +1
>>
>> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
>> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
>>> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
>>> ping
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Matt Post]

Yes, I've verified that those don't match, either.

I can't think of a reason that they *shouldn't* match. Tommaso, do you have any 
idea why they're different? Are these two locations out of sync?



> On Mar 29, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Michael A. Hedderich 
> <m...@michael-hedderich.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> from my last mail:
> 
> "What does not match for me are the md5 or sha1 of the stagging repo with
> those of the source release artifacts. E.g. https://repository.apache.org/
> content/repositories/orgapachejoshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua
> -incubating/6.1/joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5 vs
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/joshua
> -incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5  "
> 
> If this is the expected behavior, then its a +1 from me, too.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> 2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:
> 
>> Hi Folks,
>> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
>> possible.
>> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
>> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
>> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
>> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>> 
>> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>> 
>> To clarify, I'm a +1
>> 
>> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>> 
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
>> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
>>> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
>>> ping
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:
> 
>> Hi Folks,
>> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
>> possible.
>> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
>> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
>> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
>> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>> 
>> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>> 
>> To clarify, I'm a +1
>> 
>> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>> 
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
>> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
>>> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
>>> ping
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Michael A. Hedderich]

Hi,

from my last mail:

"What does not match for me are the md5 or sha1 of the stagging repo with
those of the source release artifacts. E.g. https://repository.apache.org/
content/repositories/orgapachejoshua-1005/org/apache/joshua/joshua
-incubating/6.1/joshua-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5 vs
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/joshua/6.1/joshua
-incubating-6.1-src.tar.gz.md5  "

If this is the expected behavior, then its a +1 from me, too.

Cheers,
Michael

2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:

> Hi Folks,
> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
> possible.
> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>
> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>
> To clarify, I'm a +1
>
> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
> > To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
> > Cc:
> > Bcc:
> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
> > Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
> > ping
> >
> >
>


2017-03-29 12:07 GMT-04:00 lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org>:

> Hi Folks,
> I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
> possible.
> I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
> Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
> agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
> newsletter... which has a wide reader base.
>
> Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.
>
> To clarify, I'm a +1
>
> [0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
> dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
> > To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
> > Cc:
> > Bcc:
> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
> > Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
> > ping
> >
> >
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[lewis john mcgibbney]

Hi Folks,
I would also like to encourage people to take a look and VOTE as soon as
possible.
I'm in regular contact with some folks over at the Linguistic Data
Consortium [0] (as are several of us I'm sure) and they have tentatively
agreed to announce our release (should it be done by then) in their next
newsletter... which has a wide reader base.

Thank you Tommaso for hanging on here.

To clarify, I'm a +1

[0] https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:39 AM, <
dev-digest-h...@joshua.incubator.apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> From: Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org" <dev@joshua.incubator.apache.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:39:18 +
> Subject: Re: ping on RC4 vote
> ping
>
>

Re: ping on RC4 vote

[Tommaso Teofili]

ping

Il giorno mer 15 mar 2017 alle ore 12:55 Tommaso Teofili <
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Hi all,
>
> could you please have a look at RC4 and eventually vote ?
> If there's any major issue, just let me know and I'll cancel it right away.
>
> Regards,
> Tommaso
>