No worries! Hope you had a great vacation. :)
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
Good work, and awesome you made it through our release process :-)
sorry I wasn't able to vote on this RC. I've been on vacation last week.
BR,
Benedikt
Josh Elser schrieb am Mi., 18. Mai 2016 um 17:40 Uhr:
We
Hello Josh,
Good work, and awesome you made it through our release process :-)
sorry I wasn't able to vote on this RC. I've been on vacation last week.
BR,
Benedikt
Josh Elser schrieb am Mi., 18. Mai 2016 um 17:40 Uhr:
> We've let this go a bit longer than the originally specified date range,
We've let this go a bit longer than the originally specified date range,
but let's close it now that we have consensus.
This VOTE passes with 3 binding +1's and 1 non-binding +1.
Thanks again for everyone's help who made this a reality. I'll try to
follow through and find some docs on the step
+1
Gary
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> All,
>
> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
>
> Maven repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1166
> Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/com
Yes, that's correct.
I'm now +1 (non-binding)
--
Sean Busbey
On May 16, 2016 13:44, "Josh Elser" wrote:
> Sean,
>
> Circling back around on the discussions today about Jackrabbit's NOTICE
> file, this would change your -1 vote, yes?
>
> Sean Busbey wrote:
>
>> -1 (non-binding)
>>
>> bad:
>>
>>
Thanks Bernd and Jörg for your votes so far!
By my tally, we're one (binding) vote away from passing this!
Gary or Sebb, any chance either of you could cast a vote (I assume this
fell by the wayside when we thought there were issues with the NOTICE file)?
sebb wrote:
On 17 May 2016 at 17:57,
On 17 May 2016 at 17:57, Bernd wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks Josh!
>
> This is a binding +1
>
> (however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another
> RC or before releasing the repo):
>
>
> 2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser :
>
>> All,
>>
>> Please consider the following for
Hello,
Thanks Josh!
This is a binding +1
(however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another
RC or before releasing the repo):
2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser :
> All,
>
> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
>
> Maven repository
Hi,
built this version from source the tarball. IBM JDK' still fail, but it
seems caused by a test making wrong assumptions (see VFS-500). Built with
JDK 9 fails because of failure with jar plugin. However, all tests pass
previously.
Therefore: +1
Cheers,
Jörg
Josh Elser wrote:
> All,
>
>
See https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Zk01ufa8icmfvo8
It should be Jackrabbit who best decides what is covered by what in the
NOTICE file; however evidence so far is strongly showing JcrUtils to be IP
clean not needing any NOTICE; and so I would suggest continuing with the
RC2 vote as is. If Ja
Just a suggestion. Ask on the jackrabbit Dev list.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 16, 2016, at 5:28 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>
> JackrabbitMain seems to be based on jackrabbit-standalone module
>
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/blob/1.5/jackrabbit-standalone/src/main/
Sean,
Circling back around on the discussions today about Jackrabbit's NOTICE
file, this would change your -1 vote, yes?
Sean Busbey wrote:
-1 (non-binding)
bad:
* LICENSE/NOTICE file is missing a bundled third party reference[1]
maybe fine:
* source artifacts mostly match source tag[2]
*
On 2016-05-16 08:29, Josh Elser wrote:
> +cc busbey (in case he misses this discuss, otherwise)
>
> Does this make sense to you? I'm sure you have a better understanding
> than I do at the fringes of licensing @ the ASF :)
>
> tl;dr Those copied files from jackrabbit were added after the cod
Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
I'll ask on dev@jackrabbit to be sure.
>
> Agreed - so I've tracked it ashttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-611
>
> Could you assign it to me so I can mark it as In Progress?
Tried, but cannot find you as an assign target.
BTW, there is a sibling file
+cc busbey (in case he misses this discuss, otherwise)
Does this make sense to you? I'm sure you have a better understanding
than I do at the fringes of licensing @ the ASF :)
tl;dr Those copied files from jackrabbit were added after the code was
already graduated from Incubator, thus, the or
JackrabbitMain seems to be based on jackrabbit-standalone module
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/blob/1.5/jackrabbit-standalone/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/standalone/Main.java
which starts in 2008:
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/commit/de58b89320ed768a89035197b46f1486b35d430d
On 16 May 2016 at 10:56, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> On 16 May 2016 at 10:10, sebb wrote:
>
>> Ignore that, I see you found the actual source file,
>> so clearly it is not from the original Day contribution.
>>
>> I was mislead by the comments in the source which implied it came from
>> various
On 16 May 2016 at 10:10, sebb wrote:
> Ignore that, I see you found the actual source file,
> so clearly it is not from the original Day contribution.
>
> I was mislead by the comments in the source which implied it came from
> various sources.
> It would be helpful to identify the actual sources
On 16 May 2016 at 10:05, sebb wrote:
> On 16 May 2016 at 08:51, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>> In Jackrabbit's source code I find JcrUtils added in 2009:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/commit/0882a5cc1ed4ce1cf9d3c6b3a592f97c5772ce25
>>
>> but Jackrabbit graduated from the incubator in
On 16 May 2016 at 08:51, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> In Jackrabbit's source code I find JcrUtils added in 2009:
>
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/commit/0882a5cc1ed4ce1cf9d3c6b3a592f97c5772ce25
>
> but Jackrabbit graduated from the incubator in 2006:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/project
In Jackrabbit's source code I find JcrUtils added in 2009:
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/commit/0882a5cc1ed4ce1cf9d3c6b3a592f97c5772ce25
but Jackrabbit graduated from the incubator in 2006:
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/jackrabbit.html
So presumably the software from Day Software
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:13 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 13 May 2016 at 01:24, Sean Busbey wrote:
> > -1 (non-binding)
> >
> > bad:
> >
> > * LICENSE/NOTICE file is missing a bundled third party reference[1]
> >
> > maybe fine:
> >
> > * source artifacts mostly match source tag[2]
> > * build / test fr
On 13 May 2016 at 01:24, Sean Busbey wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> bad:
>
> * LICENSE/NOTICE file is missing a bundled third party reference[1]
>
> maybe fine:
>
> * source artifacts mostly match source tag[2]
> * build / test from source works[3]
>
> fine:
> * verified signatures and checksums[4]
On 13 May 2016 at 03:18, Josh Elser wrote:
> Hey Sean,
>
> #1 sounds like you're right here. I hadn't done a close enough over the
> codebase. I will defer to PMC members with more history than the few weeks I
> have...
>
> #2/3 about the sandbox is intentional. There is code in the sandbox which
Wow, good catch on #1. I had not seen it. Aside from that, it looks good
(MD5, SHA1, ASC, reports, build). So another RC and we should be good to go.
Gary
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> bad:
>
> * LICENSE/NOTICE file is missing a bundled third party r
Hey Sean,
#1 sounds like you're right here. I hadn't done a close enough over the
codebase. I will defer to PMC members with more history than the few
weeks I have...
#2/3 about the sandbox is intentional. There is code in the sandbox
which is not "fit to be released" (see so previous conver
-1 (non-binding)
bad:
* LICENSE/NOTICE file is missing a bundled third party reference[1]
maybe fine:
* source artifacts mostly match source tag[2]
* build / test from source works[3]
fine:
* verified signatures and checksums[4]
[1]:
core/src/test/java/org/apache/commons/vfs2/provider/webda
Thank you for rolling this out. I'll go through the RC tonight.
Gary
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> All,
>
> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
>
> Maven repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1166
Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ r13608
MD5 commons-vfs-distribution-2.1-bin.tar.gz
8cc35a3169e
29 matches
Mail list logo
