On 30/03/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 29/03/2008, Petar Tahchiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > Hi Sebb,
>  >
>  >  thanks for the feedback.
>  >
>  >  I prefer to keep the bz2 archives. I have improved the licenses according
>  >  to the lib folder.
>
>
> There are still several jars in the lib directory which are not
>  mentioned in the licenses/README.txt.
>
>  README.txt says:     Apache ServletAPI - Apache 2.0
>
>  However, the MANIFEST in servlet-api-2.5.jar suggests that the owner
>  is Sun, not Apache, and the license may not be AL 2.0.
>
>
>  > Also I have made the MANIFEST.MF to include the data you pointed.
>
>
> But the compiler versions are not in
>  cactus.core.framework.uberjar.javaEE.14-1.8.0.jar.
>
>  Also, the version says source and target = 1.4, yet the code was built
>  (and presumably tested) with Java 1.6. The code should be built and
>  tested with Java 1.4.
>
>  I just tried "mvn install" with Java 1.4, and a lot of tests failed.
>  The ones I checked failed with:
>
>  java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/w3c/dom/ranges/DocumentRange
>
>
>  >  Also the META-INF folder to include the LICENSE and NOTICE files.
>
>
> However, these files need to relate to the contents of the jar or
>  archive - for example, the ones in the cactus jars should only mention
>  Apache, as all the code therein is Apache, as far as I can tell.
>
>  The N & L files for the archives need to mention the external software
>  that is included.
>
>
>  > I have also included the 'source' and 'target' versions in the
>  >  parent pom.xml and also the inceptionYear attribute.
>
>
> The inceptionYear should agree with the first Copyright year.
>
>  The pom includes the lines:
>
>  <url>scp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/www/jakarta.apache.org/cactus/1.8.0/</url>
>  <tagBase>file:////home/peter/tags/</tagBase>
>
>  which are unlikely to work for other users.
>
>
>  >  Now I think that everything is OK.
>  >
>  >  You can see the new files here:
>  >  http://people.apache.org/dist/jakarta/cactus/1.8.0/
>
>
> Where is the RC tag for the source?
>  There should be an RC tag and a build that is made from the tag.
>  If the vote succeeds, the tag can be copied to the release tag.
>  If not, then a new tag can be made once all the fixes have been
>  applied, and the process repeated.
>
>  It looks like the final release tag has already been created.
>  If the vote fails, this will have to be deleted and recreated once the
>  fixes have been made.
>  That's not ideal for release tags.
>
>
>  >  Tomorrow morning I will cast a release-vote for these archives.
>
>
> Sorry, but I don't think they are ready.
>

Just ran RAT on cactus-trunk - there are a lot of files that don't
have the proper AL header.

>
>  >
>  >  Cheers, Petar.
>  >
>  >
>  >  On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 3:43 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  >  > On 29/03/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  > > On 25/03/2008, Petar Tahchiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  > >  > Hi everybody,
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  I am following this tutorial:
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > http://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/HttpComponentsCoreReleaseProcess
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  and making it for Cactus. So I want to invite you all to test the
>  >  > archives I
>  >  > >  >  have uploaded
>  >  > >  >  here:
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  http://people.apache.org/dist/jakarta/cactus/
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  and report problems if you find some.
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  > > Not sure it's useful to include the bz2 archives; although they are
>  >  > >  slightly smaller, the user-base is much smaller...
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  The licenses/README.txt file does not seem to agree with the jars in
>  >  > >  the lib directory.
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  Also, several of the jars in the lib directory are quite old 
> versions;
>  >  > >  if possible, they should be updated.
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  The generated cactus jars must contain NOTICE and LICENSE files (e.g.
>  >  > >  in the META-INF directory)
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  It would be useful if the cactus jar manifests included the following
>  >  > >  attributes:
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  Built-By: xxxxx
>  >  > >  Implementation-Title: Jakarta Cactus
>  >  > >  Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation
>  >  > >  Implementation-Vendor-Id: org.apache
>  >  > >  Implementation-Version: 1.8-SNAPSHOT
>  >  > >  Specification-Title: Jakarta Cactus
>  >  > >  Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation
>  >  > >  Specification-Version: 1.8-SNAPSHOT
>  >  > >  Build-Jdk: 1.5.0_12 (e.g.)
>  >  > >  X-Compile-Source-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.)
>  >  > >  X-Compile-Target-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.)
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  There seem to be some problems with SVN file properties; I've fixed
>  >  > >  most of them in trunk.
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  Did you create the archives from trunk?
>  >  > >  There are some discrepancies between that and the source archive.
>  >  > >
>  >  >
>  >  > Just noticed that the pom.xml does not specify the source and target
>  >  > java versions.
>  >  > It should also have inceptionYear
>  >  >
>  >  > Might be an idea to use a property for the version so the individual
>  >  > poms don't have to be updated.
>  >  >
>  >  > The eclipse .classpath file looks a bit odd - it seems to have lots of
>  >  > entries that don't seem to be required.
>  >  >
>  >  > >
>  >  > >  >  If no problems occur, I will continue with the next steps of the
>  >  > tutorial
>  >  > >  >  and make
>  >  > >  >  "official" release archives and cast a vote upon them.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  Thank you all.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  P.S. You can also have a look at the new Cactus web-site I have
>  >  > uploaded
>  >  > >  >  here:
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  http://jakarta.apache.org/cactus/1.8.0/
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  I am currently doing final test upon it and then I will upload it 
> as
>  >  > >  >  "official" Cactus site.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  --
>  >  > >  >  Regards, Petar!
>  >  > >  >  Karlovo, Bulgaria.
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  EOOXML objections
>  >  > >  >  http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >  >  Public PGP Key at:
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9
>  >  > >  >  Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9
>  >  > >  >
>  >  > >
>  >  >
>  >
>  > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >  --
>  >
>  > Regards, Petar!
>  >  Karlovo, Bulgaria.
>  >
>  >  EOOXML objections
>  >  http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections
>  >
>  >  Public PGP Key at:
>  >  http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9
>  >  Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9
>  >
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to