On 16 May 2016 at 10:59, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 May 2016 at 16:41, Keith W <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> A release candidate for the next release (6.0.3) of the Qpid Java >> Components has been created. >> >> The list of changes can be found in Jira: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20QPID%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20qpid-java-6.0.3 >> >> Please test and vote accordingly. >> >> The source and binary archives can be grabbed from here: >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/java/6.0.3-rc1 >> >> Those files and the other maven artifacts are also staged for now at: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheqpid-1073 >> >> Kind regards >> >> P.S. If you want to test it out using maven (e.g with the examples src, >> or your own things), you can temporarily add this to your poms to access >> the staging repo: >> >> <repositories> >> <repository> >> <id>staging</id> >> >> <url>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheqpid-1073</url> >> </repository> >> </repositories> >> >> >> My testing was: >> >> 1) Verified the md5/sha checksums on all binaries >> 2) Verified signatures on all binaries >> 3) Built/ran test profiles mms/dby/bdb for 0-9 and 0-10 from source bundle >> 4) Ran hello world against staged maven artefacts against broker from >> binary distribution >> 5) Ran Joram tests against Qpid JMS client 0.9.0. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > I gave things a test as follows: > - Verified all the sigs (but not checksums, note below). > - Used RAT to check the licence headers (note below). > - Ran the source build (skipped tests). > - Ran the javadoc build (failed, note below). > - Extracted the broker binary, started it, loaded the web console, > created a queue. > - Ran the Qpid JMS master HelloWorld example against the broker. > > The javadoc issue is that it fails to build under Java8, looks to be > the same issue you JIRA'd with the release profile (QPID-7260). Given > Java7 was EOL'd over a year ago, I think we are past the point this is > something we can overlook for releases, even if they are bits > generally only optionally built. I'll prepare a patch for this. > > When doing "mvn apache-rat:check" within the src archive it fails due > to the DEPENDENCIES file maven auto generated. The RAT check passes > after deleting that file. Not a blocker but would be good to fix for > future, either excluding the file given it doesnt contain any info (as > the build pom has no deps itself) or alternatively updating the RAT > config to just ignore it. The latter looks easiest, I'll prepare a > patch for that too. > > As Lorenz and I pointed out for the last couple releases, the > checksums generated by Nexus don't contain the file name so the > typical tools can't verify the files easily. It would be good if the > scripting pulling the artifacts down from nexus either updated them or > just regenerated them locally so they can more easily be used for > their intended purpose. > > Robbie
Fixed the javadoc and RAT issues on trunk and 6.0.x via https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7260 and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7266 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
