You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jena.apache.org by Rob Vesse <rv...@yarcdata.com> on 2012/08/06 18:46:10 UTC
Re: SCM Tags for Release Candidates
Sorry I wasn't sure if I was supposed to tag it when it was a release
candidate, if it should just be the intended release version then that
should be noted in the Release Process documentation for future reference
But yes we can svn move it to Jena-2.7.3 as and when the release vote
passes
Rob
On 8/4/12 11:54 AM, "Andy Seaborne" <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>+1
>(one comment, not blocking)
>
> Andy
>
>
>Tested on Ubuntu 12.04, java 7 unless otherwise stated.
>
> does everything work on MS Windows?
>Yes (I had to special boot windows for this!)
>Windows 7 / 64 bit.
>Downloaded apache-jena and jena-fuseki
>Ran Fuseki, with TDB database; also accessed same database form command
>line after.
>
> does everything work on OS X?
>No idea
>
> is the GPG signature fine?
>Yes
>(and MD5 and SHA1)
>
> is there a source archive?
>Yes
> can the source archive really be built?
>Yes
>"mvn clean test" works
>
> is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
> (both source and binary artifacts)?
>Yes
>
> does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
>Yes
>
> if there is a tag in the SCM, does it contain reproducible sources?
>
>Yes but it's "2.7.3-RC3", not "jena-2.7.3" [*]
>
>(I directly set the tag to "version" for the last two builds so that
>POMs gets right version, not the RC).
>
>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/tags/2.7.3-RC3/
>
>Let's move it to jena-2.7.3 after release (incubator style).
>
>Also:
>
>bin/tdbquery --version
>Jena: VERSION: 2.7.3
>Jena: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>ARQ: VERSION: 2.9.3
>ARQ: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>TDB: VERSION: 0.9.3
>TDB: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>
>./fuseki-server --version
>Jena: VERSION: 2.7.3
>Jena: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>ARQ: VERSION: 2.9.3
>ARQ: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>TDB: VERSION: 0.9.3
>TDB: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>Fuseki: VERSION: 0.2.4
>Fuseki: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>
>On 03/08/12 23:19, Rob Vesse wrote:
>> +1
>>
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On 8/3/12 12:39 PM, "Rob Vesse" <rv...@cray.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here is a vote on a release build for Jena 2.7.3.
>>>
>>> Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote.
>>> (We do need at least 3 PMC +1's but the more it's tested, the better.)
>>>
>>> This is a distribution of Jena (IRI, core, ARQ, TDB) and also of
>>>Fuseki.
>>> The external dependencies are the same as for Jena 2.7.3.
>>>
>>> Versions:
>>>
>>> jena-parent 3
>>> jena-iri 0.9.3
>>> jena-core 2.7.3
>>> jena-arq 2.9.3
>>> jena-tdb 0.9.3
>>> apache-jena 2.7.3 (the combined distribution)
>>>
>>> jena-fuseki 0.2.4 (separate binary)
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>>
>>>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-119/<ht
>>>tp
>>> s://repository.apache.org/ent/repositories/orgapachejena-285/>
>>>
>>> Proposed dist/ area:
>>>
>>>http://people.apache.org/~rvesse/Jena-2.7.3-RC3/<http://people.apache.or
>>>g/
>>> ~andy/Jena-2.7.2/dist/>
>>>
>>> Keys:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS
>>>
>>> SVN tag:
>>>
>>>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/tags/2.7.3-RC3/<https://svn.apache.
>>>or
>>> g/repos/asf/jena/tags/jena-2.7.2/>
>>>
>>> NB. This picks up jena-sdb and jena-larq as well. The source-release
>>> does not; jena-sdb and jena-larq are not included in the build.
>>>
>>>
>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>>>
>>> This vote will be open to the end of
>>>
>>> Monday, 6th August, 23:59 UTC
>>>
>>> (72 hours from the same hour tonight UTC).
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> Checking needed:
>>>
>>> does everything work on MS Windows?
>>> does everything work on OS X?
>>> is the GPG signature fine?
>>> is there a source archive?
>>> can the source archive really be built?
>>> is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
>>> (both source and binary artifacts)?
>>> does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
>>> if there is a tag in the SCM, does it contain reproducible
>>>sources?
>>
>
Re: SCM Tags for Release Candidates
Posted by Rob Vesse <rv...@yarcdata.com>.
I have svn moved the tag to Jena-2.7.3
Rob
On 8/6/12 9:46 AM, "Rob Vesse" <rv...@cray.com> wrote:
>Sorry I wasn't sure if I was supposed to tag it when it was a release
>candidate, if it should just be the intended release version then that
>should be noted in the Release Process documentation for future reference
>
>
>But yes we can svn move it to Jena-2.7.3 as and when the release vote
>passes
>
>Rob
>
>On 8/4/12 11:54 AM, "Andy Seaborne" <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>+1
>>(one comment, not blocking)
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>Tested on Ubuntu 12.04, java 7 unless otherwise stated.
>>
>> does everything work on MS Windows?
>>Yes (I had to special boot windows for this!)
>>Windows 7 / 64 bit.
>>Downloaded apache-jena and jena-fuseki
>>Ran Fuseki, with TDB database; also accessed same database form command
>>line after.
>>
>> does everything work on OS X?
>>No idea
>>
>> is the GPG signature fine?
>>Yes
>>(and MD5 and SHA1)
>>
>> is there a source archive?
>>Yes
>> can the source archive really be built?
>>Yes
>>"mvn clean test" works
>>
>> is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
>> (both source and binary artifacts)?
>>Yes
>>
>> does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
>>Yes
>>
>> if there is a tag in the SCM, does it contain reproducible
>>sources?
>>
>>Yes but it's "2.7.3-RC3", not "jena-2.7.3" [*]
>>
>>(I directly set the tag to "version" for the last two builds so that
>>POMs gets right version, not the RC).
>>
>>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/tags/2.7.3-RC3/
>>
>>Let's move it to jena-2.7.3 after release (incubator style).
>>
>>Also:
>>
>>bin/tdbquery --version
>>Jena: VERSION: 2.7.3
>>Jena: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>ARQ: VERSION: 2.9.3
>>ARQ: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>TDB: VERSION: 0.9.3
>>TDB: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>
>>./fuseki-server --version
>>Jena: VERSION: 2.7.3
>>Jena: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>ARQ: VERSION: 2.9.3
>>ARQ: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>TDB: VERSION: 0.9.3
>>TDB: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>Fuseki: VERSION: 0.2.4
>>Fuseki: BUILD_DATE: 2012-08-03T11:40:41-0700
>>
>>On 03/08/12 23:19, Rob Vesse wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On 8/3/12 12:39 PM, "Rob Vesse" <rv...@cray.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Here is a vote on a release build for Jena 2.7.3.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote.
>>>> (We do need at least 3 PMC +1's but the more it's tested, the better.)
>>>>
>>>> This is a distribution of Jena (IRI, core, ARQ, TDB) and also of
>>>>Fuseki.
>>>> The external dependencies are the same as for Jena 2.7.3.
>>>>
>>>> Versions:
>>>>
>>>> jena-parent 3
>>>> jena-iri 0.9.3
>>>> jena-core 2.7.3
>>>> jena-arq 2.9.3
>>>> jena-tdb 0.9.3
>>>> apache-jena 2.7.3 (the combined distribution)
>>>>
>>>> jena-fuseki 0.2.4 (separate binary)
>>>>
>>>> Staging repository:
>>>>
>>>>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-119/<h
>>>>t
>>>>tp
>>>> s://repository.apache.org/ent/repositories/orgapachejena-285/>
>>>>
>>>> Proposed dist/ area:
>>>>
>>>>http://people.apache.org/~rvesse/Jena-2.7.3-RC3/<http://people.apache.o
>>>>r
>>>>g/
>>>> ~andy/Jena-2.7.2/dist/>
>>>>
>>>> Keys:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS
>>>>
>>>> SVN tag:
>>>>
>>>>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/tags/2.7.3-RC3/<https://svn.apache
>>>>.
>>>>or
>>>> g/repos/asf/jena/tags/jena-2.7.2/>
>>>>
>>>> NB. This picks up jena-sdb and jena-larq as well. The source-release
>>>> does not; jena-sdb and jena-larq are not included in the build.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>>>>
>>>> This vote will be open to the end of
>>>>
>>>> Monday, 6th August, 23:59 UTC
>>>>
>>>> (72 hours from the same hour tonight UTC).
>>>>
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Checking needed:
>>>>
>>>> does everything work on MS Windows?
>>>> does everything work on OS X?
>>>> is the GPG signature fine?
>>>> is there a source archive?
>>>> can the source archive really be built?
>>>> is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact
>>>> (both source and binary artifacts)?
>>>> does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions?
>>>> if there is a tag in the SCM, does it contain reproducible
>>>>sources?
>>>
>>
>