Re: [VOTE] Apache Beam release 0.3.0-incubating

2016-10-28 Thread Dan Halperin
More on DEPENDENCIES: The latest version of Apache's maven-parent explicitly excludes it from the RAT check. [0] I see other projects have the same file e,g,. [1]. See also the linked issues from the Apache pom [2]. I think that file's presence may be WAI? [0] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/

Re: [VOTE] Apache Beam release 0.3.0-incubating

2016-10-28 Thread Dan Halperin
Hi Justin, Thanks for excellent detailed analysis, as usual! 1) Hmm! I do see a file called `DEPENDENCIES` in the source release [0], but it is not checked in [1]. It must be introduced somehow by `mvn release-plugin`, following our release process [2]. To clear up some possible confusion: We

[RESULT] Release Apache Beam, version 0.2.0-incubating

2016-08-07 Thread Dan Halperin
I am happy to announce that the Incubator PMC has approved version 0.2.0-incubating-RC2 of Apache Beam for release as version 0.2.0-incubating. There have been 6 binding approval votes from the IPMC: * Jean-Baptiste Onofré * John D. Ament * Justin Mclean * P. Taylor Goetz * Seetharam Venkatesh *

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.2.0-incubating

2016-08-07 Thread Dan Halperin
ache Beam, version 0.2.0-incubating > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > - built from source > > - “incubating” in file name > > - NOTICE and LICENSE look good > > - license headers present > > - no wayward binaries > > - signatures check out > > > > -T

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.2.0-incubating

2016-08-02 Thread Dan Halperin
checked: signatures and digests, source releases file layouts, > matched git tags and commit ids, incubator suffix and disclaimer, NOTICE > and LICENSE files, license headers, build sources in a clean environment > (Maven 3.3.9, OpenJDK 1.8.0_91 64-Bit, Debian amd64). > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.2.0-incubating

2016-08-01 Thread Dan Halperin
Thanks very much Justin for your attention to detail! I've filed BEAM-510, BEAM-513, BEAM-514, BEAM-515 for the website issues you pointed out below, and I've sent PRs for 510 & 513. Though it may be obvious, I'll remind everyone that these proposed changes to the incubator-beam-site repository do