On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Dave <snoopd...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 03.09.2014 05:03, Jake Farrell 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. > > > > Agreed. And it is (or should be) normal process to start a new vote for > > every new set of release bits. Even if 1.0.0 is just a repackaging of > > 1.0.0-rc4, there may be bugs in the packaging process itself (such as > > we've seen in this thread, when files that were not intended to be > > released were bundled in the release artefacts), so the PPMC should test > > and vote again. > > > But, if 1.0.0 is not a repackage but instead the *exact* same set of files > as 1.0.0-rc4 but each has been renamed to remove the rc4 designation then > voting again is redundant and unnecessary. Do you agree? >
How could you possibly do that without updating the source code? Certainly there's something, even if just a pom file, that mentions the version # and should refer back to an exact git tag/revision (in your case). > > - Dave >
