Jake, Thanks for clarifying. To echo the other sentiments already pointed out, when I look at those you listed (Cassandra in particular), I notice that they seem to vote for every single release, even if it's a repackage of an existing RC. This is from traversing a couple months worth of their mailing list and seeing the trend. I think if that's what you're trying to emulate then Usergrid should follow that to a T. As others have mentioned, there are some additional errors in the packaging, which I've already tried to bring to light on usergrid's mailing list.
- package contents seem to contain too much (remove node_modules and some other folders from the distribution) - Update NOTICE to include some of the missing dependencies As I think I've seen brought up before as well, there are some less important things to fix: - When noting the tag, please link to your repo - When noting the release artifacts, they need to be on distribution mirror in dev. - Make sure when you link to a IPMC vote thread, it matches the exact same release #. John On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarr...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi John > I requested that Dave add the RC tag to better keep track of multiple > release candidates and make it easier for testing and not mixing any > previous version up accidentally. This is very common and currently done in > many TLP's including Thrift, Mesos, and Cassandra to name a few. > > -Jake > > > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:20 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Dave <snoopd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Dave <snoopd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:09 PM, John D. Ament < > john.d.am...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Also, your release vote is for RC4. Please vote on your PPMC for > 1.0 > > > >> first. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see why that is necessary. We already voted to release > Usergrid > > > > 1.0 on the PPMC list. > > > > > > > > > > I should also mention that the reason we named the release files with > > > "-rc4" is because one of our mentors insisted that we do so. > > > > > > > Could you like to such an exchange and perhaps could the mentor speak up > to > > clarify? > > > > I'm by no means saying that you can't create a 1.0.0-rc4 release. What > you > > can't do, as far as I am aware, is create a release called 1.0.0-rc4, > then > > simply restate that it's actually 1.0.0. > > > > (for all intents and purposes, I *support* your rc4 naming convention, I > > use the same thing at work. However we re-execute the release with the > new > > version applied in maven. > > > > > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > >
