freemarker-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release FreeMarker 2.3.24-rc01-incubating
Date Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:27:55 GMT
Hi,

One other request.  Right now it looks like you're creating two source
releases.  I think ideally each source release would be voted on separately
(since fundamentally they're two different artifacts).  If you got to a
point where there could be a single source release that would be great, but
from looking at your architecture and branching process I don't think
that's possible.

In addition, what some people do is push the release tags to a personal
repo (e.g. hosted on github) and vote off of that commit.  Alternatively,
there's nothing stopping you from creating a release branch in the ASF git
repo and pushing to that to do the vote.

John

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 7:20 AM Daniel Dekany <ddekany@freemail.hu> wrote:

> Thursday, January 7, 2016, 9:35:08 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I guess the timing picked is not the best for having more people on
> > board...
>
> Yeah, but it was simply when the code was ready.
>
> > BTW, the release manager can also vote a release.
>
> When he knows what's he doing... :)
>
> > So far I've successfully checked in the source release:
> >
> > * signatures and digests
> > * incubator suffix and disclaimer
> > * build sources in a clean environment (oracle java
> > 8u66+8u65arm-1~webupd8~1 on debian 64bits).
> >
> > Some comments:
> >
> > * Release is not tagged in git tags, and vote mail does not contain
> commit id to check.
>
> Indeed, the commit ID was missing.
>
> As of tagging, I used to do that when the commit has actually made it
> to become a public release, because tags are public. Is that good that
> way?
>
> > * There is a URL to the maven staging area.
>
> You wanted to write that there's *no* URL? (We had no Maven access yet
> when it was done.)
>
> > * KEYS file contains only one public gpg, the one from the release
> > manager for this release candidate, formally that's fine. Please,
> > all other committers should add theirs keys there too for preparing
> > for next releases (in case someone else jumps in the release manager
> role).
> >
> > * Tarballs contain wrong source layout, the root directory contains
> > no version details (apache-freemaker-src and
> > apache-freemarker-gae-src respectively).
>
> OK. (The misinformation came from
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html: "For
> project, Apache Foo (say) with source and binary types, it is
> conventional for the main binary to unpack to apache-foo and the
> source to apache-foo-src.".)
>
> > * The section about the "files developed outside the FreeMarker
> > project" in the LICENSE file should actually go in the NOTICE,
> > specifying details there. I'd say the path should be full from the
> > root of the sources: src/main/resources/freemarker/ext/...
>
> I did these.
>
> I wonder, since the owner of FreeMarker is now the ASF, do we still
> need to add notices for those DTD-s that are also Apache products
> (though from a different project)?
>
> > * Also I'd move the "Historical notes" to the README.
>
> I have instead deleted them, if that's fine. I don't think they are
> useful enough (or well visible for lawyer-types) to be in the README.
> There's a page about the project history on the web site which covers
> this topic.
>
> > * Source tree contains some JARs at
> > src/test/resources/freemarker/ext/jsp/webapps/ that shoudl be noticed in
> NOTICE
>
> Added them, also the OpenOffice files. These are all produced by the
> FreeMarker project BTW.
>
> > Because that, I have to vote -1 for releasing FreeMarker
> > 2.3.24-rc01-incubating.
>
> Thanks for your remarks, I will soon come up with a new attempt to
> vote on!
>
> > First ASF release is very important for every project, so all the
> > work done now will make much easier next ones.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Daniel Dekany <ddekany@freemail.hu>
> wrote:
> > I have updated
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/ so that
> > the tar.gz-s has a top-level apache-freemarker ro
> > apache-freemarker-src directory in them. Nothing else has been
> > changed.
> >
> >
> > Sunday, January 3, 2016, 1:44:17 AM, Daniel Dekany wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Mentors, and everyone else!
> >>
> >> As it turns out, this Release Candidate will go through the same
> >> procedure as a stable release would (2 round of voting, etc.), because
> >> (or, if?) we want to publish it on the home page for a month before
> >> the final release, giving people time for testing, which legally makes
> >> it to a "real" release.
> >>
> >> To everyone, if you can, please test this release with your own
> >> FreeMarker-dependent projects (like OFBiz), and in general try to find
> >> rough edges, tell your insights. Here's the binary with full
> >> documentation and change log:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.24-rc01-incubating/binaries/apache-freemarker-2.3.24-rc01-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> >>
> >> Dear Mentors, please check if this complies with the ASF policies,
> >> etc., then vote! Also check if you agree with this dist directory
> >> structure (this will be our first ASF release):
> >>
> >>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/
> >>
> >> Notes:
> >>
> >> - "gae" is the Google App Engine compliant variant. Most users can just
> >>   ignore it.
> >>
> >> - See the README for the build instructions.
> >>
> >> - We aren't yet in the Apache Maven repo - I will soon ask Infra to
> >>   set things up. Note that this RC will only go to the staging repo even
> >>   then, as otherwise it would be synced with the Central (right?).
> >>
> >> - You can run `ant rat`. If you extract the two distributions (I mean
> >>   the binary and source archives) under build/dist/bin and
> >>   build/dist/src, it will also check those. (Or if you ran `ant dist`
> >>   earlier.)
> >>
> >> The vote is open for 72 hours, or until the necessary number of
> >> binding votes (3 +1) is reached.
> >>
> >>     [ ] +1 Release this package
> >>     [ ]  0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
> >>     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >>
> >> If this vote passes, we will start a 2nd vote at general@incubator.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >  Daniel Dekany
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Thanks,
>  Daniel Dekany
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message