Hi Roman, thank you for reviewing the release. * the format of your hashes is not super convenient for an automatic comparison, being compatible with command line tools is probably a good idea [Nazeer] Can you give some more details please. May be a link to some Apache projects will help us to change hash formats :-) * I feel that including both LICENSE and LICENSE.md may confuse people [Nazeer] Will work on this in next releases * I am really happy you've integrated rat check into the build, but it would be really nice if you could make it available from the top level folder [Nazeer] rat is configured in such way, it will check all directories and files from top level directory. I feel current approach is OK. Please let us know otherwise * I seems weird that you release war file in a tarball instead of a Maven repo [Nazeer] Will start a discussion with Fineract community and will take their opinion also.
Thanks, Nazeer On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > a couple of nits: > * the format of your hashes is not super convenient for an automatic > comparison, being compatible with command line tools is probably a > good idea > * I feel that including both LICENSE and LICENSE.md may confuse people > * I am really happy you've integrated rat check into the build, but > it would be really nice if you could make it available from the top > level folder > * I seems weird that you release war file in a tarball instead of a > Maven repo > > Thanks, > Roman. > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > +1 binding > > > > I checked: > > - signatures and hashes correct > > - incubating in release names > > - DISCLAIMER exists in source > > - LICENSE and NOTICE good > > - All source files have ASF headers > > - No unexpected binary files > > - Can compile from source > > > > I would remove the list of software included in the binary release from > the source release LICENSE file. It’s fine to have two different license > files. The LICENSE may also be missing a license for jquery [1]? > > > > The convenience binary file is missing LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER in > the top level, however the LICENSE and NOTICE file is inside the war and > look correct. Can you fix this in the next release please. > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > > > 1. ./docs/system-architecture/css/toc-0.1.2/example/jquery.js > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
