incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Approve release CXF 2.0.5-incubator
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:04:23 GMT
On 31/03/2008, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
> On Monday 31 March 2008, sebb wrote:
>  > On 31/03/2008, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:15 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > > > -1: there should be NOTICE and LICENSE files at the top level in
>  > > > SVN.
>  >
>  > May I suggest resolving this via Legal discuss?
>  > It's also pretty easy to add the two files to SVN...
>
>
> Fine.   We'll take that under advisement for 2.0.6 as legal-discuss and
>  other discussions figure it out.   For 2.0.5, I don't think we should be
>  changing requirements in the middle of a vote.  The current setup has
>  been fine for MANY releases from CXF and from other projects.  Once
>  legal or whomever finalizes things, we can adjust, but that shouldn't
>  hold up the 2.0.5 release.
>

I don't think it is a change of requirements, just that these
requirements were not fully documented.

See in particular:

http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice/discuss

... [RoyFielding] Yes, the repository itself is a form of distribution


>
>  > > > -1: SVN and the source archive don't agree; there are files and
>  > > > directories in each that are not in the other.
>  >
>  > I can understand why you may wish to omit the bin and benchmark
>  > directories, but I think consumers expect to find everything they need
>  > in the archives; it should not be necessary to retrieve additional
>  > files from SVN.
>  >
>  > Are the following directories really not needed in the source archive?
>  >
>  > distribution/src/main/release/samples/callback/build
>  > distribution/src/main/release/samples/ws_policy/build
>  > distribution/src/main/release/samples/ws_rm/build
>
>
> No.  They are empty directories that shouldn't be in svn either.   I've
>  gone ahead and deleted them on trunk.  Will get the 2.0.x branch in a
>  bit.   But it's pretty irrelevant for the 2.0.5 release.

OK

>  > Also build.xml
>  Which is ONLY there for the cruisecontrol instance we have running inside
>  IONA.   It's relatively specific to that machine and thus is not
>  something that should be "released" like the benchmark dir.  It's a
>  specific file that is there to make sure the builds keep running
>  smoothly and devs don't break the build.

OK

>  Dan
>
>
>
>  > > Could you please reconsider your vote?  AFAIK, we have always voted
>  > > on releases, not on the SVN tag.  The tag is just a way to
>  > > (re-)build the release and not something we vote on and distribute.
>  > > Furthermore, there's no policies yet around these issues that are
>  > > still being discussed.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > --
>  > > Cheers,
>  > > Guillaume Nodet
>  > > ------------------------
>  > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>  >
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>  > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
>  --
>  J. Daniel Kulp
>  Principal Engineer, IONA
>  dkulp@apache.org
>  http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message