On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:18 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 3 September 2014 16:26, Dave wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:14 AM, John D. Ament
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> So - just to confirm. If I look at
> >> apache-usergrid-incubating-1.0.0-rc5-source.tar.gz the contents in the
> >> pom.xml files will re
On 3 September 2014 16:26, Dave wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:14 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>>
>> So - just to confirm. If I look at
>> apache-usergrid-incubating-1.0.0-rc5-source.tar.gz the contents in the
>> pom.xml files will read the version "1.0.0-rc5" and the git tag will also
>> read
On 3 September 2014 17:26, Dave wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:14 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
> >
> > So - just to confirm. If I look at
> > apache-usergrid-incubating-1.0.0-rc5-source.tar.gz the contents in the
> > pom.xml files will read the version "1.0.0-rc5" and the git tag will also
> >
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:14 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
>
> So - just to confirm. If I look at
> apache-usergrid-incubating-1.0.0-rc5-source.tar.gz the contents in the
> pom.xml files will read the version "1.0.0-rc5" and the git tag will also
> read "1.0.0-rc5" then after you do an svn mv the pom f
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Dave wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:29 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Dave wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 03.09.2014 05:03, Jake Farrell wrote:
> > > > > Hi John
> > > >
Does that mean that the TAG for usergrid-1.0.0 is the exact same
as that for RC4??
Recall that a released codebase must be directly tracked
to a specific SVN tag in our repo.
On Sep 3, 2014, at 7:41 AM, Dave wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:29 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2
My responses to each issue you listed are below...
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>
> Having looked into the code and release discussion, its obvious that the
> project still has some miles to go:
>
> - voting for the correct release (naming)
>
To avoid confusing released artif
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:29 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Dave wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Branko Čibej 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 mu
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Dave wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Branko Čibej 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 n
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
m
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Branko Čibej 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
On 3 September 2014 06:21, Branko Čibej 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 co
On 3 September 2014 09:46, Lewis John Mcgibbney
wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> What is not stated on the VOTE to general@ is how long this thread is open
> for.
> It does however state the trouble that Usergrid has transitioned to being a
> compliant (codewise) podling.
> I notice (and thank you) for not
Hi John,
What is not stated on the VOTE to general@ is how long this thread is open
for.
It does however state the trouble that Usergrid has transitioned to being a
compliant (codewise) podling.
I notice (and thank you) for not VETO'ing this RC.
I do however also accept that the release candidate
On 02.09.2014 23:06, Dave wrote:
> Rats. That directory should not have been included in the release. It
> is created as part of the build process and the contents are fetched
> by Bower (similar to how Maven pulls in jars). Thanks for your
> attention to detail. I will have a new set of release fi
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 Thri
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
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Dave wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Dave wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:09 PM, John D. Ament
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Also, your release vote is for RC4. Please vote on your PPMC f
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Dave wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:09 PM, John D. Ament
> > 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 a
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:08 PM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering if they should just exclude node_modules from their
> release.
> > It's more like an external dependency, typically excluded from releases.
> >
> > There are also many binary
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:08 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> I'm wondering if they should just exclude node_modules from their release.
> It's more like an external dependency, typically excluded from releases.
>
> There are also many binary images in the source release, not expected.
>
Thanks John.
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:09 PM, John D. Ament
> 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 sho
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:09 PM, John D. Ament
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.
- Dave
Also, your release vote is for RC4. Please vote on your PPMC for 1.0 first.
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:58 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>
> > Hi Dave!
> >
> > So, I started looking around and I don't think NOTICE is properly
> > documented - there are lot
I'm wondering if they should just exclude node_modules from their release.
It's more like an external dependency, typically excluded from releases.
There are also many binary images in the source release, not expected.
I agree, the notice file is not correct. For example, NUnit shows as
bundled
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:58 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> Hi Dave!
>
> So, I started looking around and I don't think NOTICE is properly
> documented - there are lots of things that would seem to require
> notice that aren't there.
>
> portal/node_modules/bower/node_modules/update-notifier/node_modul
Hi Dave!
So, I started looking around and I don't think NOTICE is properly
documented - there are lots of things that would seem to require
notice that aren't there.
portal/node_modules/bower/node_modules/update-notifier/node_modules/chalk
Chalk, for instance doesn't appear to be documented (/me
Release files are located here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/usergrid/usergrid-1/v1.0.0/
Thanks,
Dave
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Dave wrote:
> The Usergrid project has prepared a release candidate (RC4) and has voted
> to release it as Apache Usergrid 1.0 (incubating
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 02.09.2014 15:51, Dave wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:43 AM, John D. Ament
> > wrote:
> >
> >> So... do you have a 1.0 artifact staged somewhere? I get that it's a
> >> rebuild of RC4, but I don't see that release referenced anywhere
On 02.09.2014 15:51, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:43 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
>> So... do you have a 1.0 artifact staged somewhere? I get that it's a
>> rebuild of RC4, but I don't see that release referenced anywhere on your
>> site.
>>
> The release files are here: http://people.ap
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:43 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> So... do you have a 1.0 artifact staged somewhere? I get that it's a
> rebuild of RC4, but I don't see that release referenced anywhere on your
> site.
>
The release files are here: http://people.apache.org/~snoopdave/usergrid/
- Dave
>
So... do you have a 1.0 artifact staged somewhere? I get that it's a
rebuild of RC4, but I don't see that release referenced anywhere on your
site.
- John
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Dave wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:00 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> > I'm a bit confused by your word
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:00 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> I'm a bit confused by your wording. Are you saying that this is 1.0 or
> 1.0.0-rc4?
The vote is to release Apache Usergrid 1.0.
- Dave
I'm a bit confused by your wording. Are you saying that this is 1.0 or
1.0.0-rc4?
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Dave wrote:
> The Usergrid project has prepared a release candidate (RC4) and has voted
> to release it as Apache Usergrid 1.0 (incubating). Now it's the Incubator
> PMC's turn to
34 matches
Mail list logo
