On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Gary Gregory<ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil.ste...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 6:19 PM >> To: Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Codec 1.4 based on RC3 >> >> Niall Pemberton wrote: >> > I have prepared a third release candidate for Codec 1.4 following the >> > feedback from the first. >> > >> > [ ] +1 Yes go ahead an release based on RC3 >> > [ ] -1 No, because... >> > >> > The tag for RC3 is here: >> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/codec/tags/CODEC_1_4_RC3/ >> > >> > The release artefacts are here >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/ >> > >> > Site is available here: >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/site/ >> > (note: some links are relative and will be broken until deployed to >> > proper codec home) >> > >> > RAT Report: >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/site/rat-report.html >> > >> > CLIRR Report: >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/site/clirr-report.html >> > >> > Release Notes: >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/site/changes-report.html >> > http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc3/RELEASE-NOTES.txt >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > Niall >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >> > > Niall, thank you for cutting the RC. > > The default.properties file contains: > > junit.jar = ${junit.home}/junit-3.8.2.jar > > The JUnit 3.8.2 download contains junit.jar, not junit-3.8.2.jar. I have made > the change in SVN. > >> Sigs and hashes are good and both ant and maven builds work fine on jdk >> 1.4-1.6. >> >> I see there are 2 issues open with fix version = 1.4 and 3 more that are >> uncategorized. >> >> I am +1 on this release assuming the open issues can be assigned to a >> later release. >> >> Are all of the files in the top-level directory of the source >> distribution necessary, still-maintainted, and relevant? > > Phil, you must be talking about the -src file, as opposed to the -bin > version. The -bin zip looks clean, no extra files at the root there. > > For the -src zip file: > > It is a bit odd to have a RELEASE-NOTES file for each release. I usually see > one file that contains just the information for the current release or the > whole history, one release after another, which is my preference (from newest > to oldest release.) > > The RELEASE-NOTES files for older version are in a different format that our > current nice and clean format for 1.4, but I would still rather see all the > history in one file, no matter what the format. > > The RELEASE-PLAN file is not up to date since it does not contain an entry > for release 1.4. IMO, it should be removed or updated. As it is now, it does > not have much value.
I've removed the RELEASE-PLAN document > I do not think we need to deliver LICENSE-header.txt. It is nice to have in > SVN for developers but I am pretty sure the build does not use it, unless > mavens checks to see that each Java source file starts with those bits? LICENSE-header.txt is used by checkstyle in the maven2 build to check the java source files start with the standard ASF header Niall > Gary > >> >> Phil >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
