jclouds-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache jclouds 1.6.1-incubating, RC2
Date Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:14:30 GMT
Will do. I didn't make ay changes to the binary assembly, other than its name, so it's not
a surprise that there are changes needed there.

A.



On Jun 4, 2013, at 4:15 AM, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org> wrote:

> hehe (have a look at helix release procedure:  section 5 of
> http://helix.incubator.apache.org/releasing.html )
> 
> I have some issues with jclouds-cli-assembly-1.6.1-incubating.zip/tar.gz
> 
> It doesn't include:
> * DISCLAIMER
> * NOTICE (especially this one must contains "I. Included Software
> section" as it contains a lot of jars) (as a sample see this file in
> the Apache Karaf distrib). And BTW the other sections (II. Used
> Software and III. License Summary) I'm pretty maven can do that for
> you ;-) . All included jars have compliant license (mostly Apache
> except bouncycastle but MIT so ok)
> * LICENSE
> 
> 2013/6/4 Andrew Bayer <andrew.bayer@gmail.com>:
>> 'cos I didn't know that was an option? =)
>> 
>> people.a.o is back, fwiw.
>> 
>> A.
>> 
>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> I will but when people.a.o will be back.
>>> Why not using svnpubsub for vote ?
>>> 
>>> 2013/6/3 Andrew Bayer <andrew.bayer@gmail.com>:
>>>> And FYI, I'd be very, very appreciative of any mentors who can review RC2
>>>> and vote.
>>>> 
>>>> And I'm +1 binding, PPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> A.
>>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Andrew Bayer <andrew.bayer@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> My tendency in this direction was prompted by David and others pointing
>>>>> out that the release commit for RC0 wasn't actually pushed to the 1.6.x
>>>>> branch. That does seem like poor form, even though the tag was pushed.
>>> I'm
>>>>> definitely open to advice and suggestions on this - I've got experience
>>>>> with the release plugin, and I've got experience with iterating RCs for
>>> ASF
>>>>> votes, but I don't have experience meshing the two. =)
>>>>> 
>>>>> A.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 2, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Andrew Phillips <aphillips@qrmedia.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Re the difference with the rc0 commit and now - experience. The
>>> revert
>>>>> commits are so I could run the release plugin again for the  next RC,
>>> and I
>>>>> didn't do the reverts until I cut the RC. I'm still  figuring out the
>>> best
>>>>> way to do RCs Apache-style combined with the  Maven release plugin...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cool, thanks for the explanation. I'm assuming from that that you
feel
>>>>> the "prepare-then-revert" style is preferred (vs. the
>>>>> "prepare-locally-and-dont-commit").
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Fine with me, although I'd be interested to know what the thoughts
are
>>>>> around having multiple commits between the "prepare" and the "revert",
>>> all
>>>>> of which have a "release" version in their POMs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> @mentors: any guidance you can contribute here?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ap
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Olivier Lamy
>>> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Olivier Lamy
> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

Mime
View raw message