I checked out the source from the 0.90 tag and it builds fine from an empty mvn repository on Mac OS X and the reactor summary is clean. I also randomly chose several of the samples from the distribution binaries (calculator-script, supplychain, simple-bigbank, implementation-composite) and they work as advertised.
+1 from me On 5/21/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have done necessary updates to STATUS page [1], and the Incubator Tuscany page [2]. Note that the changes on the incubator page takes a little while to get reflect on the live website. [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/STATUS [2] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/tuscany.html On 5/21/07, ant elder < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think that document says we MUST include the STATUS document. It > says "Check status document" meaning check that the STATUS doc doesn't say > there are outstanding legal issues that may prevent a release. Even if > that > releasemanagement doc did say we must, the doc is still under development > and in draft state so I'm not sure its binding policy. Given other recent > incubator releases didn't include the STATUS doc and an IPMCer recently > said > it could be removed from a distro i think this is not a blocking issue. > > ...ant > > On 5/21/07, Luciano Resende < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Regarding the STATUS document, I think the policy say we must include > > them, > > check [1] on the "Release Documentation" and "STATUS document" sessions. > > Also our STATUS file is not up to date, and I can take care of helping > > updating that after I finish reviewing the rest of the release > candidate. > > > > [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html > > > > On 5/21/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hey many thanks for the prompt and detailed review. > > > > > > I can't remember exactly about the STATUS file, i think it may be an > old > > > requirement that is no longer necessary. I can find this > > incubator-general > > > email [1] about the recent CXF release which included and old and > > > incorrect > > > status file, and the guidance from an IPMC member was its ok to just > > > remove > > > it from the distro, so i think its fine we don't include this. > > > > > > All these other comments seem like good things we should do in future, > > if > > > we > > > do have to respin the 0.90 distro's for some other reason I'll try to > > > incorporate some of them. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > ...ant > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200705.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > On 5/21/07, kelvin goodson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ant, > > > > I've had a good poke around and built the source distro and run > the > > > > tests > > > > successfully. The only potential blocking issue I have found is that > > > > absence > > > > of a STATUS file, which it was my understanding should be copied in > > > from > > > > the project's STATUS file into every distribution, but I haven't > been > > > > able > > > > to re-find that guidance in the apache site. Can anyone help clarify > > > this > > > > please? > > > > > > > > The rest of these comments are all minor observations that wouldn't > > stop > > > > me > > > > +1-ing the release. Indeed, some of them may result in > clarification > > > that > > > > what you have done is corrent and that will help SDO in future > > releases? > > > > > > > > I've had comments in the past that Apache like it if the names of > the > > > > release file names include the "apache-" prefix > > > > > > > > I think the copyright in the NOTICES file at the top level of the > > source > > > > distro should include 2005 > > > > > > > > I thought that the intention of the BUILDING file was to guide a > > person > > > > who > > > > has downloaded the source distribution to be able to recreate the > > > > distribution files, not just to compile and test? I can't re-find > > the > > > > guidance on that having searched that apache site. > > > > > > > > The LICENSE file in binary distro contains CPL 1.0 twice, once for > > > wsdl4j > > > > and then at the bottom for Jruby. > > > > > > > > It would be really helpful to include a package.html file for each > > > package > > > > so that the javadoc gives an overview of what each package does. > > > > > > > > Cheers, Kelvin. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 20/05/07, ant elder < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Please review and vote on the 0.90 release artifacts of Tuscany > SCA > > > for > > > > > Java. > > > > > > > > > > The artifacts are available for review at: > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/0.90-rc1/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eantelder/tuscany/0.90-rc1/> > > > > > > > > > > This includes the binary and source distributions, the RAT > reports, > > > and > > > > > the > > > > > Maven staging repository. > > > > > > > > > > The SVN tag for the release is: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/tags/java/sca/0.90-incubating/ > > > > > > > > > > Looks ok to me so here's my +1. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > > > > > > > ...ant > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Luciano Resende > > Apache Tuscany Committer > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende<http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
