[RESULT][VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

The vote for this release of Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 (incubating) has concluded. Thank you all for your vote. Here are the votes: +1 4 (binding): David Fisher Furkan Kamaci Jean-Baptiste Onofre Antoine Toulme +0 0 -1 0 The vote has passed. We will proceed to release the artifacts. Thanks all!

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

Dave, I appreciate and thank you for your change of vote. I already have changed how we generate the NOTICE in our binary distribution - next time, I might run it by the list here before the vote starts to discuss its format. > On Nov 22, 2020, at 11:32 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi Antoine,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

Hi Antoine, With your explanations I’m changing my VOTE: +1 (binding) Regards, Dave > On Nov 21, 2020, at 3:42 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote: > > > >> On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:50 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:25 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote: >>> >>> The binaries are

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

Hi, +1 from me. I checked: - Incubating in name - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE and NOTICE are fine - No unexpected binary files - Checked PGP signatures - Checked checksums - Code compiles and tests successfully run - Apache rat checks are OK Kind Regards, Furkan KAMACI On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

> On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:50 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > > >> On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:25 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote: >> >> The binaries are generated by the build. > > I ran a build the jars were generated, but the scripts in the bin are not > anywhere in the source tree. Those aren’t built I

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

> On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:25 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote: > > The binaries are generated by the build. I ran a build the jars were generated, but the scripts in the bin are not anywhere in the source tree. Those aren’t built I have no idea where the binary convenience got those scripts. > > I

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

The binaries are generated by the build. I thought the build was a vote on the sources and their distribution, while binaries are convenience. Do you have an example of (3)? > On Nov 21, 2020, at 2:20 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > Incubator in name, Signatures, Hashes, NOTICE,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

Hi - Incubator in name, Signatures, Hashes, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER are in place. Source package LICENSEs are fine. Binaries - (1) bin directory - where are the sources for the scripts and bat files in the Source Release? (2) bin directory - what is the license for these files? (3) LICENSE is

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

+1 (binding) I checked signature, headers, build. Thanks, Regards JB > Le 19 nov. 2020 à 20:16, Antoine Toulme a écrit : > > Hi all, > > We're voting on the source distributions available here: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/tuweni/1.3.0-incubating/ > The release tag is

Re: [VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

I am voting here with +1 (binding). I checked signatures, they match. I checked the build from source and ran the instructions, and the sources built OK. I checked the tag in GitHub, all good. Cheers, Antoine > On Nov 19, 2020, at 11:16 AM, Antoine Toulme wrote: > > Hi all, > > We're

[VOTE] Apache Tuweni 1.3.0 release

Hi all, We're voting on the source distributions available here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/tuweni/1.3.0-incubating/ The release tag is present here: https://github.com/apache/incubator-tuweni/releases/tag/v1.3.0-incubating-rc Please review and vote as appropriate. The