Source, signature and checksums look good to me. Build looks good. LICENSE/NOTICE files look good.
There are a number of wink-json4j test files that could have license headers, IMO. As they are trivial, they are ok. However, makes validation a lot easier if they have license headers. Would like to see this fixed in future releases. Here's my +1. --kevan On Nov 6, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Mike Rheinheimer wrote: > Hi Winkers, > > I'm calling a vote to release Wink 1.1.2 (RC1) > > The Maven staging area is at: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-042/ > > Please double check under the following folders: > org/apache/wink/wink/ (no jars) > org/apache/wink/apache-wink/ > org/apache/wink/wink-assembly/ (no jars) > org/apachw/wink/wink-assembly-aggregatejar* > > This appears to be correct, as it follows the pattern of our SNAPSHOTs and > the prior release. > > The distributions are in: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-042/org/apache/wink/apache-wink/1.1.2-incubating > > This release is tagged at: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wink/tags/wink-1.1.2-incubating > > The vote will be open here for at least 72 hours. (Note, since this email > originated mid-day Saturday, I'll close the vote Wednesday Nov. 10 at > 10:00am CST.) > > Guide to testing staged releases: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1
