(08:33:18 AM) jsdelfino: hi all
(08:33:45 AM) bhdaniel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
entered the room.
(08:33:52 AM) ant_: hi
(08:34:13 AM) rfeng: hi
(08:34:14 AM) kgoodson: hi
(08:35:01 AM) jsdelfino: I'm not sure what else you guys want to
discuss today, but I'd like to quickly go over the status of M1
(08:35:59 AM) jsdelfino: is it ok if we start with that?
(08:36:05 AM) ant_: ok
(08:36:28 AM) jsdelfino: so here's the status:
(08:37:03 AM) jsdelfino: - we had a positive vote to publish the
release, all +1s no -1 on our dev list
(08:37:17 AM) jsdelfino: - the vote closed yesterday 4pm PDT
(08:38:20 AM) jsdelfino: - in parallel I had posted on
[email protected] an email asking people from the incubator
to review the distributions
(08:39:02 AM) jsdelfino: - we got one response, archived there:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200605.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(08:39:51 AM) jsdelfino: reporting a few little nits, and one more
serious problem, our JARs missing NOTICE files under META-INF
(08:40:08 AM) kgoodson_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered the room.
(08:40:45 AM) kgoodson left the room (quit: "Chatzilla 0.9.73 [Firefox
1.5.0.3/2006042618]").
(08:41:07 AM) jsdelfino: - I fixed these problems under JIRA
TUSCANY-414, I had to create a branch of the M1 tagged level to do that,
and posted the updated distributions under
http://people.apache.org/~jsdelfino/test-incubating-M1/JIRA-tuscany-414/
(08:41:49 AM) jsdelfino: the changes are tracked in the subversion
commits linked with TUSCANY-414
(08:42:28 AM) jsdelfino: changes only affect the pom.xml, license,
notice and manifest.mf files
(08:42:55 AM) jsdelfino: now the question is:
(08:43:47 AM) jsdelfino: - do we have to vote again to publish the
updated distro? or do we just test the updated distro without a new
vote? or should we proceed with the incubator vote?
(08:43:53 AM) jsdelfino: what do you think?
(08:43:57 AM) ant_: no
(08:44:13 AM) kgoodson_ left the room (quit: Client Quit).
(08:44:17 AM) ant_: lets go for the ipmc vote
(08:44:37 AM) [1]jboynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered the room.
(08:44:40 AM) jsdelfino: +1 from me, what about others?
(08:45:17 AM) luckbr1975 [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered the
room.
(08:45:18 AM) kgoodson [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered the room.
(08:45:52 AM) dkulp: +1
(08:46:11 AM) isilval [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered
the room.
(08:46:13 AM) dkulp: Q: is the NOTICE thing an incubator requirement or
apache requirement?
(08:46:18 AM) [1]jboynes: sorry, just managed to get on, what are we
voting on?
(08:47:11 AM) ant_: should we go for an IPMC vote on the M1 release
(08:47:23 AM) jsdelfino: I had to update the distro to have NOTICE files
in the JARs, have both NOTICE and LICENSE under META-INF, the correct
MANIFEST.MF files
(08:47:39 AM) jsdelfino: see
http://people.apache.org/~jsdelfino/test-incubating-M1/JIRA-tuscany-414/
(08:48:02 AM) jsdelfino: feedback from the incubator list,
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200605.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(08:48:20 AM) dkulp: I'm just curious as most of the other apache
projects DON'T put those files in the META-INF... (example: none of the
maven 2 jars)
(08:48:26 AM) jsdelfino: and I'm asking if we should vote again to
publish the updated distro or proceed with the incubator PMC vote
(08:48:53 AM) jsdelfino: a number of them do
(08:49:16 AM) [1]jboynes: none of the issues robert raised impact the
distro we voted on so I think we should ask the ipmc to publish just the
distro we voted on
(08:49:23 AM) [1]jboynes: i.e what was there
(08:49:37 AM) [1]jboynes: and that we don't post the jars to the maven repo
(08:51:33 AM) [1]jboynes: anyone here?
(08:51:58 AM) ant_: can't we use the fixed dist with the notice files
and call the IPMC vote on that?
(08:52:15 AM) jsdelfino: IMO not being able to post the JARs to the
maven repos is a problem
(08:53:18 AM) [1]jboynes: then I think we need to do a new distro (e.g.
M1.1) and vote on that
(08:54:33 AM) ant_: really? the ipmc find problems with other incubating
projects trying to do releases, i thought they usually just fixed the
problem and the vote carried on
(08:54:50 AM) jsdelfino: that's my understanding as well
(08:55:07 AM) [1]jboynes: I though they fixed the problem, revoted and
then carried on
(08:55:21 AM) [1]jboynes: otherwise the community has not voted on the
thing being released
(08:56:12 AM) ant_: i don't see the need, anyone can post a -1 to
incubator general if they've a problem with the new dist zip, we've all
seen it and know whats changed
(08:57:31 AM) ant_: could we call a vote on IPMC and at the same time
ask if we need to revote here?
(08:57:54 AM) jsdelfino: I looked at servicemix and activemq, they had
problems with the distros and fixed them, and I didn't see that they
revoted, but maybe I missed the second vote...
(08:58:07 AM) [1]jboynes: sure - you're handling it - have fun
(08:58:09 AM) kgoodson left the room (quit: "Chatzilla 0.9.73 [Firefox
1.5.0.3/2006042618]").
(08:58:12 AM) [1]jboynes: can we move on?
(08:58:37 AM) jsdelfino: can we close this before moving on?
(08:59:04 AM) ant_: jsdelfino, +1. we need to close M1 before moving on
(08:59:08 AM) kgoodson [EMAIL PROTECTED] entered the room.
(09:00:16 AM) jmarino: sounds good
(09:00:17 AM) [1]jboynes: yeah - you're going to ask the ipmc to vote -
isn't this closed?
(09:02:46 AM) jsdelfino: ok, so I'm going to archive the distro we voted
on as RC4, send an email to our dev list asking all of you to review the
final one, and will send an email to the IPMC requesting a vote
(09:03:05 AM) cr22rc: +1
(09:03:06 AM) jsdelfino: are u guys ok with that?
(09:03:10 AM) kevin: +1
(09:03:32 AM) jmarino: I'm confused, is the review a vote?
(09:03:40 AM) jmarino: or is it an eyeball?
(09:05:50 AM) jsdelfino: I think it's clearer if it's a vote, review the
updated distro and +1 to publish it or -1 if there's an issue with it
(09:06:41 AM) jmarino: k so we're voting now? Sorry to be so dense but
I'm slow this morning
(09:07:39 AM) [1]jboynes: now I'm confused - I suggest a vote and ant
didn't like that so I thought we weren't
(09:08:04 AM) jmarino: if it's an eyeball, can we just time box it and
if no one says anything, just publish?
(09:08:40 AM) jsdelfino: it's up to you guys, do you want to vote? or
just review with a time box?
(09:08:44 AM) ant_: i didn't think another dev list vote was needed, if
it is then fine
(09:09:53 AM) [1]jboynes: I think it's important - this is an official
release from the project which is an act of the foundation and those
need formal approval
(09:10:29 AM) ant_: ok. so asking the IPMC to vote will wait till after
this new dev list vote?
(09:10:38 AM) [1]jboynes: I think it would be better to be squeaky clean
than try and bend the system like servicemix et al do
(09:10:49 AM) kevin: i would like to quickly review (run a couple of
samples) and vote
(09:10:55 AM) [1]jboynes: but that's just my opinion
(09:11:16 AM) ant_: if its a proper vote it needs 72 hours
(09:11:21 AM) jsdelfino: I agree that we need to have a clean process,
that's the very reason that I'm bringing this up this morning
(09:12:26 AM) jmarino: maybe we should be cautious on this?
(09:12:36 AM) jmarino: go with a vote just to be sure?
(09:12:53 AM) jmarino: it's low overhead except for the 72 hours
(09:13:01 AM) dkulp: I guess the question I have: is there any reason
NOT to just do another vote?
(09:13:16 AM) jsdelfino: jmarino, yes I agree
(09:13:25 AM) jsdelfino: I don't see a reason
(09:13:28 AM) dkulp: I don't see an extra 72 hours as being a big deal
anymore. (since we missed java one)
(09:14:31 AM) jsdelfino: with respect to the 72 hours, what if all the
committers vote quicker than 72 hours? do we still need to wait for 72
hours before asking the IPMC? given that this is the second vote...
(09:14:45 AM) [1]jboynes: yes
(09:15:01 AM) [1]jboynes: that's one of the rules
(09:15:51 AM) ant_: ok so another dev list vote, all going well call the
IPMC vote friday
(09:15:59 AM) jsdelfino: :)
(09:16:11 AM) kevin: sounds good
(09:16:49 AM) ant_: will give us time for all those M1-website JIRAs :)
(09:17:25 AM) jsdelfino: ok let's do that then, I'll call for another vote.
(09:21:18 AM) jsdelfino: the M1-website JIRAs are very important to get
fixed this week.
(09:22:15 AM) jsdelfino: do you guys agree? there's a lot of work left
with the documentation of M1 that needs to go on the web site
(09:25:38 AM) kevin: agree
(09:30:45 AM) ant_: I have to go for a bit sorry...
(09:30:53 AM) ant_ is now known as ant_onCall
(09:33:01 AM) jsdelfino: I think we're done with the M1 discussion, what
else do people want to discuss?
(09:33:15 AM) kevin: i would like to hear how things went at J1
(09:33:21 AM) gwinn left the room.
(09:34:49 AM) cr22rc: Curious ... I put some minor fixes in.. will the
rebuild inlcude those?
(09:35:27 AM) cr22rc: or are you building from the tag and adding deltas ?
(09:35:30 AM) jsdelfino: no, just the updates to LICENSE, NOTICE and
MANIFEST, no code changes
(09:35:44 AM) cr22rc: k
(09:35:55 AM) jsdelfino: created a branch from the tag, all the changes
are tracked under TUSCANY-414
(09:40:57 AM) jsdelfino: IMO J1 went well, the SOA panel discussion was
interesting, and we also had good questions at the Tuscany BOF, even
though our session was running at the same time as the JavaOne party
(09:45:12 AM) cr22rc: any one committed any intrestest in getting
involved with Tuscany?
(09:46:57 AM) jsdelfino: there was some interest but I'm not sure about
any commitment :)
(09:54:29 AM) jmarino: spoke with Gregor Hophe as well..maybe we can
recruit people like him
(10:02:08 AM) kevin left the room.
(10:03:38 AM) isilval left the room (quit: "Trillian
(http://www.ceruleanstudios.com";).
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
