http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/index.html mentions Release Notes but the link points to
https://archive.apache.org/dist/commons/vfs/RELEASE_NOTES.txt which of course is for 2.0. It would be helpful to use the current release notes on the site. The new RN at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/RELEASE-NOTES.txt don't mention any of the Clirr issues. On 2 May 2016 at 15:00, Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > Also, please re-read the end of the previous thread on compatibility. > > I clearly stated that there were some changes which I consider not worth > changing about the TarArchiveEntry code. If you feel like these are not > acceptable, please start a discussion about this so you can come to > consensus on how the changes should be addressed. > > > Josh Elser wrote: >> >> Sebb -- did you actually read the changes? >> >> You should note that those are all method additions which we already >> decided were allowed >> >> sebb wrote: >>> >>> I have now found the Clirr Report at >>> >>> >>> http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/commons-vfs2/clirr-report.html >>> >>> >>> There are still some breaking changes that affect BC as far as I can >>> tell, so that means I need to vote >>> >>> -1 >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2 May 2016 at 11:31, sebb<seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Also the sandbox tree is missing from the source archives. >>>> Yet there are sandbox jars in Nexus. >>>> We cannot publish source to Maven that is not also in the source >>>> artifacts. >>>> >>>> If the sandbox code is not intended to be released, it should be moved >>>> from trunk. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2 May 2016 at 11:16, sebb<seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Also please include a link to the KEYS file, i.e. >>>>> >>>>> https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS >>>>> >>>>> Note that the standard download page is >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/download_vfs.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think that should be in the site menu. >>>>> >>>>> The "Download and Build" page is more suitable for developers than end >>>>> users (especially if it points to trunk, which is not voted on) so >>>>> should not be the primary download page. >>>>> >>>>> Also there seem to be two identical copies of each of the non-Maven >>>>> release artifacts: >>>>> commons-vfs-2.1-bin >>>>> and >>>>> commons-vfs2-distribution-2.1-bin >>>>> >>>>> etc. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Are they supposed to be the same? If not what is missing from one of >>>>> them? >>>>> >>>>> On 2 May 2016 at 10:40, sebb<seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2 May 2016 at 05:28, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 >>>>>>> (rc0). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maven repository: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161 >>>>>>> >>>>>> The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release items as the above >>>>>> URL is transitory. >>>>>> The hashes allow one to tie the released files back to the vote >>>>>> thread. >>>>>> >>>>>> They can be copied from the Nexus mail. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Artifacts: >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/{binaries,source} >>>>>> >>>>>> Likewise here we include the revision id of the URL: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Staged site: >>>>>>> http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/index.html >>>>>> >>>>>> There's no Clirr report that I could find. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also the download page links to trunk rather than the specific tag. >>>>>> >>>>>>> All reports are available in the provided staged Maven site. >>>>>>> JIRA-generated >>>>>>> release notes are available in the dist.a.o "Artifacts" >>>>>>> repository. Unit >>>>>>> tests pass and the RC was built util JDK6. >>>>>> >>>>>> E-mail should really have URL to make it easy for reviewers. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The current code is available in branches/VFS-2.1 at r1741921. >>>>>>> This is what >>>>>>> will be copied to tags upon successful passing of this vote. >>>>>> >>>>>> Full URLs in e-mails please. >>>>>> Also it should be a TAG not a branch, as it should be kept if the vote >>>>>> is successful >>>>>> >>>>>>> This vote will be open for 72-hours, 2016/05/05 0500 UTC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts as version 2.1 >>>>>>> [ ] 0 OK, but... >>>>>>> [X] -1 I oppose these artifacts as version 2.1 because.. >>>>>> >>>>>> As above. >>>>>> >>>>>> No need necessarily to rebuild everything as most of the concerns >>>>>> relate to the vote e-mail and the site. >>>>>> e.g. you can rename the branch as a tag. >>>>>> >>>>>>> - Josh >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
