lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] Apache-Lucene-2.9.4g-incubating-RC1 Release (take 2)
Date Wed, 18 Jan 2012 06:26:23 GMT
That should read list devs..as in the license devs

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Prescott Nasser
Sent: 1/17/2012 9:57 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] Apache-Lucene-2.9.4g-incubating-RC1 Release (take 2)

What do you mean I wouldn't get three +1s? From the license devs? ( this group seems a bit
dead atm) or do you mean from the general? If you mean general - why do you think we won't
get 3 votes?

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig
Sent: 1/17/2012 9:34 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] Apache-Lucene-2.9.4g-incubating-RC1 Release (take 2)

On 2012-01-13, Prescott Nasser wrote:

> Alright, take 2. I've applied Stefan's patch and retagged the
> branch. I kept RC1 as it mostly stayed the
> same. http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4g-incubating-RC1/
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/tags/Lucene.Net_2_9_4g_RC1/
> Please take a look and provide me your feedback.

Signatures and hashes are good, License and NOTICE look fine, RAT seems
reasonably happy, tag and source tarball match as much as they should
(missing bin/lib/docs and the empty demo subdir of test).

I do feel uncomfortable with the idea that you wouldn't get 3 +1s
without me voting so I explicitly don't vote now but will be happy to
provide my IPMC member +1 once the vote has reached the required votes
from the community.

Stefan

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message