I also vote +1 to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module.
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid. (Please disregard the md5 link, since we do
not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk
Personally, I only sign tags on the OSS projects I lead.
If you do it on a per-commit basis, it's yet another hurdle that a contributor
has to go through. That may not be a consideration for OpenWhisk as it already
is a complicated project for the inexperienced to contribute to.
Regards,
Who knows why we haven't enabled signed commits on the apache repos -
should we require all commits to be signed?
-r
Ref: https://help.github.com/articles/signing-commits-using-gpg/
+1 to the hurdle. Even in complicated projects people (like me) like to fix
typos in READMEs
On 10.07.18, 17:46, "Rob Allen" wrote:
Personally, I only sign tags on the OSS projects I lead.
If you do it on a per-commit basis, it's yet another hurdle that a
contributor has
Thanks for the quick feedback - makes sense to try and keep frictionless.
It occurred to me while verifying the release - working with @vincent to
publish his key to avoid this:
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg: There is no indication that the
Dear IPMC members,
This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and
no 0 or -1 votes.
+1 (binding), David Grove
+1 (binding), James Dubee
+1 (binding), James Thomas
+1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
+1 (binding), Vincent Hou
+1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
+1 (non-binding),
Please count my vote as well (binding)
-mr
On 2018/07/10 20:35:14, "Vincent S Hou" wrote:
> Dear IPMC members,
>
> This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and
> no 0 or -1 votes.
>
> +1 (binding), David Grove
> +1 (binding), James Dubee
> +1 (binding),
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk
Thank everybody for the votes.
I will consolidate the result and forward it to the IPMC at
gene...@incubator.apache.org, for further approval.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM,
"...Please count my vote as well (binding)..."
Same for me.
From: Matt Rutkowski
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:11:23 PM
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Please count
13 matches
Mail list logo
