Dennis,
Since this a release of primarily pre-built binaries that are already
included with AOO I need some guidance on the requirements.
They are libraries so they can't be run for testing. Maybe if someone
uses them as libraries they could test them that way.
Three of them can be built from the provided sources but in general they
are built during AOO builds.
I think :
1. Crypto should be verified.
2. Check that LICENSE, NOTICE is present.
3. Review the README for the 2 source and javadoc jars with missing
sources.
4. Review the .pom file
Am I missing anything?
Thanks for all your guidance on this,
Carl
On 12/04/2015 12:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
Carl,
Thanks for everything you are doing to provide these useful components for
others.
I suggest waiting over the weekend to ensure that any and all
concerns/suggestions are heard.
I don't see any reason against voting on the distribution of these as a bundle.
It would be useful to discuss exactly what it is a binding vote is expected to
signify. Are there actions expected and anything that a voter is to confirm?
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 19:35
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Maven Repo Release of Java UNO Jar Files
I have created Maven bundles for the four Java UNO jar files previously
released by OpenOffice.org v3.2.1.
juh-4.1.2-bundle.jar [1], jurt-4.1.2-bundle.jar [2],
ridl-4.1.2-bundle.jar [3], unoil.jar-4.1.2-bundle.jar [4]
and additionally officebean-4.1.2-bundle.jar [5]
The jar files were copied from my installed AOO 4.1.2 program/classes
directory. I added META-INF/LICENSE and NOTICE files.
Java source files used for *-4.1.2-sources.jar were copied from my
updated working copy of trunk.
Javadoc files used for *-4.1.2-javadoc.jar were generated from these
sources.
ridl.jar is built from a mix of java sources and classes generated from
IDL files during a complete office build.
A META-INF/README file is included in the sources and javadoc jars to
explain this.
unoil.jar is completely built from IDL generated classes during a
complete office build.
A META-INF/README file is included in the sources and javadoc jars to
explain this.
These jars and the .pom files were PGP signed by me on my machine.
I was concerned about not having complete java sources and javadoc so I
asked on the legal-discuss list.
An answer to my question is here [6].
Maven repository guidelines [7]
Apache Maven Publishing [8]
If all this looks okay I will call for vote on these.
Do I call for one vote on all or individually?
Thanks,
Carl
[1]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenoffice-
1005/
[2]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenoffice-
1006/
[3]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenoffice-
1007/
[4]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenoffice-
1008/
[5]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenoffice-
1009/
[6]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-
discuss/201512.mbox/%3C5660076A.8090909%40apache.org%3E
[7] http://central.sonatype.org/pages/requirements.html
[8] http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
