You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Mark Hindess <ma...@googlemail.com> on 2009/06/09 23:28:03 UTC
Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
In message <c3...@mail.gmail.com>,
Alexei Fedotov writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> > If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be
> > made available on the download page, as usual.
>
> I'm sorry. Do I understand correctly that no binary builds are
> available now?
No, not yet. This time we are trying to do things the Apache way
so we'll make them if/when we decide we are happy with the (source)
release.
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html says:
The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
the same version number as the source release and may only add
binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of
the source code release.
It would be permissible to produce binary artefacts at the same time
as the source (as long as they are produced from the source artefacts
not from the svn tree used to create them). I was tempted but, IMNSHO,
doing so would inevitably lead to people assessing the wrong artefacts
and neglecting the all-important source artefacts.
I do some sanity checking before asking for a vote but I intend to make
the full use of the 3 days of voting to do more testing. If/when I vote
+1 it will be based on my downloading both the tar.gz and zip, checking
the signature/hash files, building them for x86 and x86_64, running
our tests, running some simple scenarios with applications (eclipse
3.4, the latest eclipse RC, groovy, tomcat, etc), etc.
Everyone has their own reasons for voting[0]. This is fine; voting is
a matter of individual "conscience". However, personally, I'd rather
people voted based on their own experience - with the artefacts they are
voting on - rather than trusting others (although there will always be
some element of trust[1]).
Regards,
Mark.
[0] I notice the number of votes significantly outnumbers the number
of downloads (and there are even fewer downloads of the
signature/hash files).
[1] I trust that someone else will test on Windows.
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Tim Ellison<t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Looks good.
> >
> > +1 from me.
> >
> > Mark Hindess wrote:
> >> I've fixed the "java -version" issue and created two signed source
> >> archives for this revision and made them available at:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~hindessm/m10/
> >>
> >> Please vote for declaring these source archives as milestone 10, and
> >> opening up the code for general development once again.
> >>
> >> This vote will be open for at least 3 days, or until all binding votes
> >> have been cast (if earlier).
> >>
> >> If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be made
> >> available on the download page, as usual.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Mark.
Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
Posted by Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, that does not stop jars from bundling.
2009/6/10 Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com>:
> All,
> I was trying to build a source release. It turned out that our build
> system relied on svn when compiling classlib modules. How you worked
> that around?
>
> compile-java:
> [echo] Compiling ACCESSIBILITY classes
>
> copy-resources:
>
> svn-info:
> [exec] Result: 1
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Mark
> Hindess<ma...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> In message <c3...@mail.gmail.com>,
>> Alexei Fedotov writes:
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>> Thanks for explaining.
>>
>> No problem. It is a change from our established process and it is good
>> to make sure everyone understands what we are doing and why. So, thanks
>> for asking.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mark.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
> http://www.telecom-express.ru/
> http://harmony.apache.org/
> http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/
>
--
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/
Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
Posted by Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com>.
All,
I was trying to build a source release. It turned out that our build
system relied on svn when compiling classlib modules. How you worked
that around?
compile-java:
[echo] Compiling ACCESSIBILITY classes
copy-resources:
svn-info:
[exec] Result: 1
Thanks!
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Mark
Hindess<ma...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> In message <c3...@mail.gmail.com>,
> Alexei Fedotov writes:
>>
>> Mark,
>> Thanks for explaining.
>
> No problem. It is a change from our established process and it is good
> to make sure everyone understands what we are doing and why. So, thanks
> for asking.
>
> Regards,
> Mark.
>
>
>
--
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/
Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
Posted by Mark Hindess <ma...@googlemail.com>.
In message <c3...@mail.gmail.com>,
Alexei Fedotov writes:
>
> Mark,
> Thanks for explaining.
No problem. It is a change from our established process and it is good
to make sure everyone understands what we are doing and why. So, thanks
for asking.
Regards,
Mark.
Re: [vote] Declare the signed source for r782693 as Milestone 10
Posted by Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com>.
Mark,
Thanks for explaining.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Mark
Hindess<ma...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> In message <c3...@mail.gmail.com>,
> Alexei Fedotov writes:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> > If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be
>> > made available on the download page, as usual.
>>
>> I'm sorry. Do I understand correctly that no binary builds are
>> available now?
>
> No, not yet. This time we are trying to do things the Apache way
> so we'll make them if/when we decide we are happy with the (source)
> release.
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html says:
>
> The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> changes to the software being released. In some cases, binary/bytecode
> packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
> not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
> source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
> the same version number as the source release and may only add
> binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of
> the source code release.
>
> It would be permissible to produce binary artefacts at the same time
> as the source (as long as they are produced from the source artefacts
> not from the svn tree used to create them). I was tempted but, IMNSHO,
> doing so would inevitably lead to people assessing the wrong artefacts
> and neglecting the all-important source artefacts.
>
> I do some sanity checking before asking for a vote but I intend to make
> the full use of the 3 days of voting to do more testing. If/when I vote
> +1 it will be based on my downloading both the tar.gz and zip, checking
> the signature/hash files, building them for x86 and x86_64, running
> our tests, running some simple scenarios with applications (eclipse
> 3.4, the latest eclipse RC, groovy, tomcat, etc), etc.
>
> Everyone has their own reasons for voting[0]. This is fine; voting is
> a matter of individual "conscience". However, personally, I'd rather
> people voted based on their own experience - with the artefacts they are
> voting on - rather than trusting others (although there will always be
> some element of trust[1]).
>
> Regards,
> Mark.
>
> [0] I notice the number of votes significantly outnumbers the number
> of downloads (and there are even fewer downloads of the
> signature/hash files).
>
> [1] I trust that someone else will test on Windows.
>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Tim Ellison<t....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 from me.
>> >
>> > Mark Hindess wrote:
>> >> I've fixed the "java -version" issue and created two signed source
>> >> archives for this revision and made them available at:
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~hindessm/m10/
>> >>
>> >> Please vote for declaring these source archives as milestone 10, and
>> >> opening up the code for general development once again.
>> >>
>> >> This vote will be open for at least 3 days, or until all binding votes
>> >> have been cast (if earlier).
>> >>
>> >> If the vote is successful, binary builds from that level will be made
>> >> available on the download page, as usual.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mark.
>
>
>
--
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/