Do you think we should run it or we already got it covered? On Jul 17, 2014, at 7:38 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote:
> RAT, but it can be a bit overly sensitive. > > Ali > On 17 Jul 2014 17:37, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is there some tool to verify that all files have the licences? >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Michael MacFadden < >> michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> Although I have been dormant. I am willing to help out with the release >>> in any way possible. If you need some one to go through the release and >>> test it. Or post it up to he web site once we have it ready let me know. >>> I haven¹t helped out in a while, so I would love to contribute. >>> >>> ~Michael >>> >>> On 7/12/14, 6:05 AM, "Ali Lown" <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Yuri, >>>> >>>> AFAIK both of these can be TODOs can be removed now. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Ali >>>> >>>> On 12 July 2014 14:01, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Ok, great. This is a great Wiki. I ll try to go the steps and later to >>>>> add >>>>> a release job to jenkins so the release process will be automated. Off >>>>> course if someone want to help with release stuff - it would be great >> :) >>>>> The wiki contains two todos: >>>>> 1. ODO: Do we need Extension-Name, Implementation-Vendor-Id as well? >>>>> 2. Check export status of any cryptographic dependencies. (Unknown >>>>> currently whether we need an ECCN or not) >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the 2- I think we got rid of it, is it right? >>>>> Regarding 1 - @Ali can you comment? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yuri, >>>>>> >>>>>> I started writing up the 'procedure' here: >>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Release+Procedure >> It >>>>>> needs updating now that we use git rather than svn. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we could get jenkins building the releases that would be great! >>>>>> (wave-artifacts doesn't seem to be generating the src releases?) >>>>>> >>>>>> Once the artifacts are made (ant release, or equivalent), then the >>>>>> next step is to manually verify the contents are as expected, and to >>>>>> sign it. >>>>>> I have a very small script to sign all the files using my key, and to >>>>>> generate the SHA512 sums for the files: http://pastebin.com/05wBkWd1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Once that is done, send it to the wave list to vote upon... >>>>>> Once that is done, send it to the incubator list to vote upon... >>>>>> Once that is done, release! ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Ali >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12 July 2014 13:21, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Thanks for update Ali. >>>>>>> I think the release is important to show that we handled all the >>>>>> copyright >>>>>>> issues, so I would prefer just to release as is and then add the >>>>>> patch >>>>>>> later. >>>>>>> Anyway, let's try to do the release stuff for rc 05. Are there any >>>>>> scripts >>>>>>> that should be run? What is the procedure? >>>>>>> By the way, I already added a Jenkins job to create the release >>>>>> artifact >>>>>> - >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/Wave/job/wave-artifacts/ >>>>>>> So, if could to automate the licenses verification and signing we >>>>>> could >>>>>>> release just by running the job in Jenkins... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> RC4 was merged back in to master around January, and development >> has >>>>>>>> continued in master from there.. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't recall any major show stoppers with RC4. A look at the >> vote >>>>>>>> thread suggests that the only problems left to discuss were the >>>>>> images >>>>>>>> in thumbnail_patterns, for which we could find no copyright >>>>>>>> assignment. But we fixed this problem in 48c3bc9, by changing the >>>>>>>> thumbnails to some we could attribute. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On a meta level, the problem at the time was that RC4 had a very >>>>>> poor >>>>>>>> vote turnout, disincentivizing further work. >>>>>>>> (And on a personal level, I ran out of time I could put towards >>>>>> Wave) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think there is anything stopping us putting together RC5 >>>>>> over >>>>>>>> this weekend. >>>>>>>> (Since we would want to take from current master, a check of the >>>>>>>> licenses will be required to be redone). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is there interest in RC5? >>>>>>>> (And do we want to put Frank's fulltextsearch patches in?) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Ali >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 12 July 2014 12:35, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I think I merged the rc 0.4 into master a while ago. But I don't >>>>>> remember >>>>>>>>> what were the issues that prevented from us to release rc 0.4. >>>>>>>>> @Ali, so you remember what were the issues? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Christian Grobmeier < >>>>>>>> grobme...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> before quite a while, we were discussing a release. It's still >>>>>> not >>>>>>>> there, >>>>>>>>>> and I would like to know what the actual problem is. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As you know, releases are considered a sign of a healthy >> project >>>>>> in >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> incubator. >>>>>>>>>> It's currently discussed within the IPMC why projects which >> don't >>>>>> manage >>>>>>>>>> to make a release >>>>>>>>>> after a year should stay in the incubator. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Christian >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> http://www.grobmeier.de >>>>>>>>>> The Zen Programmer: http://bit.ly/12lC6DL >>>>>>>>>> @grobmeier >>>>>>>>>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>
