Hi Henning, thanks for your vote. Here are a few answers to your comments:
Testing is currently performed by running the two example applications provided with the distribution, which contain various tasks. Each of them is run once for each supported database, and the logs are checked. This has to be further automated of course with proper unit tests. We deliberately desinged the build.xml supplied with the distribution that it will build a jar without a version number, assuming that people will build the jar only if they have made changes to the code (why would anyone just build it?). And if they have made changes then the version number is undefined. IMO only the official build should contain the version number. Disagree? With the struts-extentions we're in a dilemma. It won't build without servlet-api.jar and jsp-api.jar. There is an info file that informs the user about the requirement for these two jars. Does anyone have an idea how to deal with this except using maven? Can we expect all users to use maven for building the project and the examples? I very much appreciate if the other voters would not reject or abstain from voting the struts-extentions just for the build problem concering the servlet-api.jar and jsp-api.jar. We have discussed this issue with the previous release candidate and there were no objections on the way we solved this now (i.e. providing an information file). I have already asked for alternatives but no one suggested a different solution. BTW: Here's my +1 for both distributions (although non-binding). Rainer Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > > md5sum and sha1sum (on linux) did not like the checksum files. Checksums > are ok, though. > > gpg key is ok. rat looks good. > > apache-empire-db builds for me. Can't say much more. Unit tests? Any > kind of code verification? Test suite? This is hopefully just "coming > soon", right? :-) > > nitpick: build result is "empire-db.jar", the release jar included is > "empire-db-2.0.4.jar" > > +1 for apache-empire-db-2.0.4-incubating > > > apache-empire-struts-ext-1.0.4-incubating does not. It probably builds > in Eclipse but it is missing the servlet-api.jar and jsp-api.jar, which > are e.g. available on repo1. You might consider reworking your build > files to be a bit more flexible anyway. :-) > > So this is basically a -0 for apache-empire-struts-ext, I don't feel > that the build problems warrant vetoing it for this release (they will > for the next). > > According to http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html , the Freemarker > License (which is BSD-like) nor the Hypersonic License (also BSD-like) > or the OpenSymphony License (which is Apache 1.1) are on that list. > While it is just a formality, can you please open issues on > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL to rubber-stamp them (and > add them to the "A" list). > > I also think, it is sufficient to have only a single LICENSES file, > which contains all the licenses used. > > Ciao > Henning > > > > On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 13:37 +0200, Jörg Reiher wrote: > > Hello, > > > > the community has approved a release of apache-empire-db-2.0.4- > incubating and apache-empire-struts2-ext-1.0.4-incubating. > > > > > > > > Pursuant to the Releases section of the Incubation Policy we would now > like to request the approval of the Incubator PMC to make the release. > > > > > > > > Release proposal: > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-empire-db- > dev/200809.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > local%3E > > > > > > > > Vote result: > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-empire-db- > dev/200809.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > local%3E > > > > > > > > My vote is > > > > +1 (non binding) > > > > > > > > Joerg > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
