You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> on 2007/08/22 20:11:25 UTC
[RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
OpenJPA Developers-
I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
right. Thanks for your patience.
On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> OpenJPA Developers-
>
> A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release after
> the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
>
> A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
>
> http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
>
> Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether we
> should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release notes
> for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
>
> The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and no
> missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in http://
> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
>
> In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or objections.
>
> A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> neutral.
>
> Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that the
> quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality of
> all of its contributors!
>
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Let's just do another respin and pull it in. The code has already been
committed and it does fix an obscure NPE with discriminator values assuming
the default type of String. Thanks for being flexible. We just need to
ensure that the vote completes before you take off on vacation, right? :-)
Kevin
On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> I don't have any opinion on whether to include it or not. I'm happy
> to create a new build, but unfortunately I'm on the road tonight, so
> it won't happen until tomorrow mid-day EST.
>
> I'll leave it to your judgement on whether it is worth the additional
> short delay in the release to re-cut.
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2007, at 8:23 PM, Michael Dick wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't vote -1 if it's not included.
> >
> > I don't think it's a major change and I'm sure we'll live if it's
> > the first
> > fix in 1.0.1. My opinion is that it's nice to have but no show
> > stopper.
> >
> > Unless anyone else has strong feelings that it should go in?
> >
> > -Mike
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> It looks like Marc kicked off a build at 1:30 or so that finished
> >> before your change made it in... should we wait around for him to get
> >> back from dinner (he's on the east coast this week) and do a new one,
> >> or start a vote on the one that just finished uploading?
> >>
> >> -Patrick
> >>
> >> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Just completed moving openjpa-326 over to the 1.0.0 branch.
> >>>
> >>> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note
> >>>>> that
> >>>>> there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is
> >>>>> not in
> >>>>> trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
> >>>>> trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
> >>>>> suitable etc.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the
> >> question. Just
> >>>> making sure we were all on the same page of the
> >> process... :-) Thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kevin
> >>>>
> >>>> -Patrick
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move
> >>>>>> over to
> >> the
> >>>>>> 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering
> >> what
> >>>>>> the process
> >>>>>> was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from
> >>>>> trunk or
> >>>>>> just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over
> >> quickly...
> >>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kevin
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but
> >> I
> >>>>>>> don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next
> >> 30
> >>>>>>> mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or
> >> is
> >>>>>>> this more of a serendipitious situation?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Patrick
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 8/22/07, Michael Dick < michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new
> >>>>> changes? I'm
> >>>>>>>> just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0
> >> .
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Mike
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> OpenJPA Developers-
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the
> >> recent
> >>>>>>>>> problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new
> >>>>> artifact
> >>>>>>>>> uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we
> >> get it
> >>>>>>>>> right. Thanks for your patience.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> OpenJPA Developers-
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0release
> >>>>> after
> >>>>>>>>>> the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> >>>>>>>>>> OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote
> >> whether
> >>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>> should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0.
> >> Release
> >>>>> notes
> >>>>>>>>>> for this release are included in the artifact, or can be
> >>>>> browsed at:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> >>>>>>>>>> project/RELEASE- NOTES.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release,
> >> and
> >>>>> no
> >>>>>>>>>> missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in
> >> the
> >>>>>>>>>> exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration
> >> in
> >>>>> http://
> >>>>>>>>>> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> >>>>>>>>>> voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be
> >> sufficient
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> approve the release for publication. While it is not
> >> possible
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard
> >> 3
> >>>>> day
> >>>>>>>>>> period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to
> >> allow
> >>>>>>>>>> people to thoroughly review the release and perform
> >> whatever
> >>>>>>>>>> additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
> >>>>> objections.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for
> >>>>> publication,
> >>>>>>>>>> "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means
> >> you
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>> neutral.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure
> >> that
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high
> >> quality
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>> all of its contributors!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Patrick Linskey
> >>>>>>> 202 669 5907
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Patrick Linskey
> >>>>> 202 669 5907
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Patrick Linskey
> >> 202 669 5907
> >>
>
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org>.
I don't have any opinion on whether to include it or not. I'm happy
to create a new build, but unfortunately I'm on the road tonight, so
it won't happen until tomorrow mid-day EST.
I'll leave it to your judgement on whether it is worth the additional
short delay in the release to re-cut.
On Aug 22, 2007, at 8:23 PM, Michael Dick wrote:
> I wouldn't vote -1 if it's not included.
>
> I don't think it's a major change and I'm sure we'll live if it's
> the first
> fix in 1.0.1. My opinion is that it's nice to have but no show
> stopper.
>
> Unless anyone else has strong feelings that it should go in?
>
> -Mike
>
> On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like Marc kicked off a build at 1:30 or so that finished
>> before your change made it in... should we wait around for him to get
>> back from dinner (he's on the east coast this week) and do a new one,
>> or start a vote on the one that just finished uploading?
>>
>> -Patrick
>>
>> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Just completed moving openjpa-326 over to the 1.0.0 branch.
>>>
>>> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note
>>>>> that
>>>>> there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is
>>>>> not in
>>>>> trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
>>>>> trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
>>>>> suitable etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the
>> question. Just
>>>> making sure we were all on the same page of the
>> process... :-) Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Kevin
>>>>
>>>> -Patrick
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move
>>>>>> over to
>> the
>>>>>> 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering
>> what
>>>>>> the process
>>>>>> was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from
>>>>> trunk or
>>>>>> just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over
>> quickly...
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but
>> I
>>>>>>> don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next
>> 30
>>>>>>> mins or so (if it hasn't already).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or
>> is
>>>>>>> this more of a serendipitious situation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Patrick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/22/07, Michael Dick < michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new
>>>>> changes? I'm
>>>>>>>> just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0
>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Mike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OpenJPA Developers-
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the
>> recent
>>>>>>>>> problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new
>>>>> artifact
>>>>>>>>> uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we
>> get it
>>>>>>>>> right. Thanks for your patience.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OpenJPA Developers-
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0release
>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>>> the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
>>>>>>>>>> OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote
>> whether
>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0.
>> Release
>>>>> notes
>>>>>>>>>> for this release are included in the artifact, or can be
>>>>> browsed at:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
>>>>>>>>>> project/RELEASE- NOTES.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release,
>> and
>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>> missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in
>> the
>>>>>>>>>> exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration
>> in
>>>>> http://
>>>>>>>>>> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
>>>>>>>>>> voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be
>> sufficient
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> approve the release for publication. While it is not
>> possible
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard
>> 3
>>>>> day
>>>>>>>>>> period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to
>> allow
>>>>>>>>>> people to thoroughly review the release and perform
>> whatever
>>>>>>>>>> additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
>>>>> objections.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for
>>>>> publication,
>>>>>>>>>> "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means
>> you
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> neutral.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure
>> that
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high
>> quality
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> all of its contributors!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Patrick Linskey
>>>>>>> 202 669 5907
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Patrick Linskey
>>>>> 202 669 5907
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Linskey
>> 202 669 5907
>>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
I wouldn't vote -1 if it's not included.
I don't think it's a major change and I'm sure we'll live if it's the first
fix in 1.0.1. My opinion is that it's nice to have but no show stopper.
Unless anyone else has strong feelings that it should go in?
-Mike
On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It looks like Marc kicked off a build at 1:30 or so that finished
> before your change made it in... should we wait around for him to get
> back from dinner (he's on the east coast this week) and do a new one,
> or start a vote on the one that just finished uploading?
>
> -Patrick
>
> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just completed moving openjpa-326 over to the 1.0.0 branch.
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note that
> > > > there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is not in
> > > > trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
> > > > trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
> > > > suitable etc.
> > >
> > >
> > > Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the
> question. Just
> > > making sure we were all on the same page of the
> process... :-) Thanks.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > > -Patrick
> > > >
> > > > On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter < kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to
> the
> > > > > 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering
> what
> > > > > the process
> > > > > was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from
> > > > trunk or
> > > > > just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over
> quickly...
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kevin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com < plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but
> I
> > > > > > don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next
> 30
> > > > > > mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or
> is
> > > > > > this more of a serendipitious situation?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Patrick
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/22/07, Michael Dick < michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new
> > > > changes? I'm
> > > > > > > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0
> .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Mike
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the
> recent
> > > > > > > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new
> > > > artifact
> > > > > > > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we
> get it
> > > > > > > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0release
> > > > after
> > > > > > > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > > > > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote
> whether
> > > > we
> > > > > > > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0.
> Release
> > > > notes
> > > > > > > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be
> > > > browsed at:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > > > > > > project/RELEASE- NOTES.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release,
> and
> > > > no
> > > > > > > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in
> the
> > > > > > > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration
> in
> > > > http://
> > > > > > > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > > > > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be
> sufficient
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not
> possible
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard
> 3
> > > > day
> > > > > > > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to
> allow
> > > > > > > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform
> whatever
> > > > > > > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
> > > > objections.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for
> > > > publication,
> > > > > > > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means
> you
> > > > are
> > > > > > > > > neutral.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure
> that
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high
> quality
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > all of its contributors!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > > > 202 669 5907
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > 202 669 5907
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> 202 669 5907
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com>.
It looks like Marc kicked off a build at 1:30 or so that finished
before your change made it in... should we wait around for him to get
back from dinner (he's on the east coast this week) and do a new one,
or start a vote on the one that just finished uploading?
-Patrick
On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just completed moving openjpa-326 over to the 1.0.0 branch.
>
> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note that
> > > there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is not in
> > > trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
> > > trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
> > > suitable etc.
> >
> >
> > Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the question. Just
> > making sure we were all on the same page of the process... :-) Thanks.
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > -Patrick
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to the
> > > > 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering what
> > > > the process
> > > > was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from
> > > trunk or
> > > > just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over quickly...
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Kevin
> > > >
> > > > On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
> > > > > don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
> > > > > mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
> > > > > this more of a serendipitious situation?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Patrick
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/22/07, Michael Dick < michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new
> > > changes? I'm
> > > > > > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > > > > > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new
> > > artifact
> > > > > > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > > > > > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release
> > > after
> > > > > > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > > > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether
> > > we
> > > > > > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release
> > > notes
> > > > > > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be
> > > browsed at:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > > > > > project/RELEASE- NOTES.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and
> > > no
> > > > > > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > > > > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in
> > > http://
> > > > > > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > > > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient
> > > to
> > > > > > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible
> > > to
> > > > > > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3
> > > day
> > > > > > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > > > > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > > > > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
> > > objections.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for
> > > publication,
> > > > > > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you
> > > are
> > > > > > > > neutral.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that
> > > the
> > > > > > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality
> > > of
> > > > > > > > all of its contributors!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > > 202 669 5907
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Patrick Linskey
> > > 202 669 5907
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
Just completed moving openjpa-326 over to the 1.0.0 branch.
On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note that
> > there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is not in
> > trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
> > trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
> > suitable etc.
>
>
> Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the question. Just
> making sure we were all on the same page of the process... :-) Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
> -Patrick
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to the
> > > 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering what
> > > the process
> > > was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from
> > trunk or
> > > just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over quickly...
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
> > > > don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> > > >
> > > > Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
> > > > mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> > > >
> > > > Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
> > > > this more of a serendipitious situation?
> > > >
> > > > -Patrick
> > > >
> > > > On 8/22/07, Michael Dick < michael.d.dick@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new
> > changes? I'm
> > > > > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Mike
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > > > > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new
> > artifact
> > > > > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > > > > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release
> > after
> > > > > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether
> > we
> > > > > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release
> > notes
> > > > > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be
> > browsed at:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > > > > project/RELEASE- NOTES.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and
> > no
> > > > > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > > > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in
> > http://
> > > > > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient
> > to
> > > > > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible
> > to
> > > > > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3
> > day
> > > > > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > > > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > > > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
> > objections.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for
> > publication,
> > > > > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you
> > are
> > > > > > > neutral.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that
> > the
> > > > > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality
> > of
> > > > > > > all of its contributors!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > 202 669 5907
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > 202 669 5907
> >
>
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
On 8/22/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note that
> there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is not in
> trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
> trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
> suitable etc.
Yep, that's what I noticed. That's why I was asking the question. Just
making sure we were all on the same page of the process... :-) Thanks.
Kevin
-Patrick
>
> On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to the
> > 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering what
> > the process
> > was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from trunk
> or
> > just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over quickly...
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
> > > don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> > >
> > > Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
> > > mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> > >
> > > Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
> > > this more of a serendipitious situation?
> > >
> > > -Patrick
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new changes?
> I'm
> > > > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
> > > >
> > > > -Mike
> > > >
> > > > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > >
> > > > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > > > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > > > >
> > > > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
> > > > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > > > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release
> after
> > > > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether
> we
> > > > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release
> notes
> > > > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed
> at:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > > > project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and
> no
> > > > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in
> http://
> > > > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> > > > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> > > > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> > > > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or
> objections.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> > > > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> > > > > > neutral.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that
> the
> > > > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality
> of
> > > > > > all of its contributors!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Patrick Linskey
> > > 202 669 5907
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> 202 669 5907
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@gmail.com>.
I don't think that Marc plans to throw away the branch -- note that
there is a decent amount of work in it at this point that is not in
trunk. So, he'd then have to also merge all those changes down to
trunk, and then we'd need to decide if everything in trunk was
suitable etc.
-Patrick
On 8/22/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to the
> 1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering what
> the process
> was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from trunk or
> just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over quickly...
> Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
> On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
> > don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
> >
> > Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
> > mins or so (if it hasn't already).
> >
> > Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
> > this more of a serendipitious situation?
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new changes? I'm
> > > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > >
> > > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > > >
> > > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
> > > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > > >
> > > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release after
> > > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > > >
> > > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > > >
> > > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether we
> > > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release notes
> > > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed at:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > > project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> > > > >
> > > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and no
> > > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in http://
> > > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > > >
> > > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> > > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> > > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> > > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or objections.
> > > > >
> > > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> > > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> > > > > neutral.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that the
> > > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality of
> > > > > all of its contributors!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > 202 669 5907
> >
>
--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
The fix is already in openjpa trunk, it just needs to move over to the
1.0.0branch. We might as well fix it. We were just wondering what
the process
was -- whether Marc was going to start over with another cut from trunk or
just re-spin from the branch. We'll move this change over quickly...
Thanks.
Kevin
On 8/22/07, plinskey@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
> don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
>
> Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
> mins or so (if it hasn't already).
>
> Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
> this more of a serendipitious situation?
>
> -Patrick
>
> On 8/22/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new changes? I'm
> > just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
> >
> > -Mike
> >
> > On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > >
> > > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> > >
> > > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
> > > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> > >
> > > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > > right. Thanks for your patience.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > >
> > > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > > >
> > > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release after
> > > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > > >
> > > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > > >
> > > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > > >
> > > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether we
> > > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release notes
> > > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed at:
> > > >
> > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > > project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> > > >
> > > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and no
> > > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in http://
> > > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > > >
> > > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> > > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> > > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> > > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or objections.
> > > >
> > > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> > > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> > > > neutral.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that the
> > > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality of
> > > > all of its contributors!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> 202 669 5907
>
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by pl...@gmail.com.
Hi,
I think that it's fair game for hardening / bugfix changes, but I
don't think that we should hold up the release for everything.
Note that a new candidate build will be kicking off in the next 30
mins or so (if it hasn't already).
Do you think that this issue is worth holding things up for, or is
this more of a serendipitious situation?
-Patrick
On 8/22/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new changes? I'm
> just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
>
> -Mike
>
> On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > OpenJPA Developers-
> >
> > I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> > problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
> >
> > I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
> > uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
> >
> > Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> > right. Thanks for your patience.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> >
> > > OpenJPA Developers-
> > >
> > > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release after
> > > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> > >
> > > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> > >
> > > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> > >
> > > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether we
> > > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release notes
> > > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed at:
> > >
> > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > > project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> > >
> > > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and no
> > > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in http://
> > > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> > >
> > > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> > > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> > > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> > > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or objections.
> > >
> > > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> > > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> > > neutral.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that the
> > > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality of
> > > all of its contributors!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907
Re: [RESCIND VOTE] Approve OpenJPA 1.0.0 release (2nd attempt)
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
Is the branch considered "open" and fair game for other new changes? I'm
just curious whether I can / should port OPENJPA-326 to 1.0.0.
-Mike
On 8/22/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> OpenJPA Developers-
>
> I am rescinding this vote for the second time, due to the recent
> problems we discovered with the new enhancer property.
>
> I expect that within the next few hours we'll have a new artifact
> uploaded and either I or Patrick will start a new vote.
>
> Sorry for all the false starts, but we want to be sure we get it
> right. Thanks for your patience.
>
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> > OpenJPA Developers-
> >
> > A second attempt is now being made to cut the 1.0.0 release after
> > the discussion at http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Approve-
> > OpenJPA-1.0.0-release-tf4306366.html .
> >
> > A candidate build for OpenJPA 1.0.0 is available at:
> >
> > http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/1.0.0/downloads/
> >
> > Please review these artifacts and signatures, and vote whether we
> > should release them as Apache OpenJPA version 1.0.0. Release notes
> > for this release are included in the artifact, or can be browsed at:
> >
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/openjpa-
> > project/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> >
> > The Apache Release Audit Tool has been run on the release, and no
> > missing licenses were found with the exceptions listed in the
> > exclusion section of the "rat-maven-plugin" configuration in http://
> > svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/branches/1.0.0/pom.xml .
> >
> > In accordance with http://www.apache.org/foundation/
> > voting.html#ReleaseVotes , three +1 votes will be sufficient to
> > approve the release for publication. While it is not possible to
> > veto a release, the vote will remain open for the standard 3 day
> > period (ending at 23:59 EST on Friday 8/24) in order to allow
> > people to thoroughly review the release and perform whatever
> > additional testing they desire and raise any concerns or objections.
> >
> > A vote of "+1" means you approve of the release for publication,
> > "-1" means you do not approve, and a "+0" or "-0" means you are
> > neutral.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your diligence in helping to ensure that the
> > quality of the OpenJPA 1.0.0 release reflects the high quality of
> > all of its contributors!
> >
> >
>
>