You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> on 2012/10/23 14:57:35 UTC
[VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Hi incubator people,
I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix!
The last few months we have been working on this release.
Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required
files into the correct place etc.
This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer:
* Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding)
* Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding)
* Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes)
See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes
As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another
thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need
one
more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a
look at this release
The source release file and signatures can be found on:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/
Before voting please review the section,
"What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?", at
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
Known issues:
* The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the "celix"
directory, this is actually "celix-0.0.1-incubating"
* The BUILDING file points to
http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html
this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next
release.
Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
--
With kind regards,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 October 2012 18:57, Matthias Friedrich <ma...@mafr.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2012-10-23, sebb wrote:
> [...]
>> There is something wrong when downloading using a browser.
>> I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same
>> (corrupted) file. However Opera is OK.
>
> Downloaded it with Chrome and the file was compressed with gzip twice.
> Same thing with the bloodhound 0.2 release, probably some problem with
> the server, it occurs when requesting with "Accept-Encoding: gzip".
I think you've found the problem.
Just downloaded http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-2.2.23.tar.gz
and the headers include:
Server: Apache/2.4.1 (Unix) OpenSSL/1.0.0g
Content-Length: 7374712
Content-Type: application/x-gzip
whereas when downloading
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/httpd/httpd-2.2.23.tar.gz
the headers include:
Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.16 OpenSSL/1.0.0 DAV/2 SVN/1.6.17
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Encoding: gzip
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: application/octet-stream
Content-Language: en
That seems wrong; I'll raise a JIRA issue for INFRA
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Matthias Friedrich <ma...@mafr.de>.
On Tuesday, 2012-10-23, sebb wrote:
[...]
> There is something wrong when downloading using a browser.
> I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same
> (corrupted) file. However Opera is OK.
Downloaded it with Chrome and the file was compressed with gzip twice.
Same thing with the bloodhound 0.2 release, probably some problem with
the server, it occurs when requesting with "Accept-Encoding: gzip".
Regards,
Matthias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 October 2012 16:43, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 October 2012 13:57, Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi incubator people,
>>
>> I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix!
>> The last few months we have been working on this release.
>> Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required
>> files into the correct place etc.
>>
>> This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer:
>> * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding)
>> * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding)
>> * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes)
>> See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes
>>
>> As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another
>> thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need
>> one
>> more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a
>> look at this release
>>
>> The source release file and signatures can be found on:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/
>
> Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release?
>
> Where is the KEYS file?
>
> -1
>
> The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers.
>
> Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes
> have an unusual format.
>
> Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can
> extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file).
>
>> Before voting please review the section,
>> "What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?", at
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>>
>> Known issues:
>> * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the "celix"
>> directory, this is actually "celix-0.0.1-incubating"
>> * The BUILDING file points to
>> http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html
>> this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next
>> release.
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> See above; the dist artifacts are badly broken.
I've now tried checking out the SVN directory, and the sigs and hashes are OK.
There is something wrong when downloading using a browser.
I tried both Firefox and Chrome; they both result in the same (corrupted) file.
However Opera is OK.
This needs to be resolved before the files can be safely published.
Also, the key needs to be uploaded to a public key server.
I've not checked the contents of the archive, because I don't know the
tag to which it is supposed to correspond.
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> --
>> With kind regards,
>>
>> Alexander Broekhuis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Content-Encoding, License for .graffle file, Was: Fwd: [VOTE]
Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 30 October 2012 20:18, Florian Holeczek <fl...@holeczek.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> taking this out of the Celix vote thread in order to keep it tidy.
>
> Sebb wrote:
>> The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license.
>
> In JSPWiki, we have a .graffle file, too. Although this is XML, I consider this a binary file, just like a JPEG image for example. It's the document format of Graffle, a graphics software for Mac OS X.
>
>> I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release. Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn reviewers about the problen.
>> Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes.
>
> The problem underneath is: When the browser tells "Accept-Encoding gzip" in its HTTP request header, it can be that a .gz download gets gzipped again. Although the server correctly responses with "Content-Encoding gzip", the browser may not handle this download correctly and save it double gzipped to disk. So you end up with a file .tar.gz which in fact is a .tar.gz.gz format. Gunzipping this manually leads to the correct data.
> So,
> * there isn't any real data corruption and
> * it seems to be at least not only the server part which is to blame here
www.apache.org does not gzip-encode the response even if requested,
which is why the browsers work OK there.
However, I suppose some mirrors might behave differently.
The problem is that many browsers and other clients don't handle
"Content-Encoding gzip" correctly.
The curl program has a --compress option which requests gzip and
handles the response, but even that fails to handle CE: gzip if
requested using -H "Accept-Encoding: gzip". Oops!
> Regards
> Florian
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Content-Encoding, License for .graffle file, Was: Fwd: [VOTE]
Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Florian Holeczek <fl...@holeczek.de>.
Hi Alexander,
Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
>> In JSPWiki, we have a .graffle file, too. Although this is XML, I consider
>> this a binary file, just like a JPEG image for example. It's the document
>> format of Graffle, a graphics software for Mac OS X.
>
> In the Celix case the file can/should be removed. But otherwise, it being a
> file created by a tool, a NOTE or README file can be used to "set" the
> license. Celix uses this to clearify the license information on some input
> files which are processed during the build.
thanks for the details. I'll remove it from the JSPWiki artifacts then, too.
>> The problem underneath is: When the browser tells "Accept-Encoding gzip"
>> in its HTTP request header, it can be that a .gz download gets gzipped
>> again. Although the server correctly responses with "Content-Encoding
>> gzip", the browser may not handle this download correctly and save it
>> double gzipped to disk. So you end up with a file .tar.gz which in fact is
>> a .tar.gz.gz format. Gunzipping this manually leads to the correct data.
>> So,
>> * there isn't any real data corruption and
>> * it seems to be at least not only the server part which is to blame here
>
> This is what I noticed as well. It seems more likely that the browser does
> something wrong here. Looking at the headers I couldn't find anything
> strange. Funny thing is, for Chrome a bug has been solved to strip an extra
> gz from downloaded files: [1]
>
> [1]: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=58168
Bugzilla entries are existing for Firefox, too, but they're not resolved yet. See [1] for example.
Regards
Florian
[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610679
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Content-Encoding, License for .graffle file, Was: Fwd: [VOTE]
Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi,
> In JSPWiki, we have a .graffle file, too. Although this is XML, I consider
> this a binary file, just like a JPEG image for example. It's the document
> format of Graffle, a graphics software for Mac OS X.
>
In the Celix case the file can/should be removed. But otherwise, it being a
file created by a tool, a NOTE or README file can be used to "set" the
license. Celix uses this to clearify the license information on some input
files which are processed during the build.
>
> > I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release.
> Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn
> reviewers about the problen.
> > Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes.
>
> The problem underneath is: When the browser tells "Accept-Encoding gzip"
> in its HTTP request header, it can be that a .gz download gets gzipped
> again. Although the server correctly responses with "Content-Encoding
> gzip", the browser may not handle this download correctly and save it
> double gzipped to disk. So you end up with a file .tar.gz which in fact is
> a .tar.gz.gz format. Gunzipping this manually leads to the correct data.
> So,
> * there isn't any real data corruption and
> * it seems to be at least not only the server part which is to blame here
>
This is what I noticed as well. It seems more likely that the browser does
something wrong here. Looking at the headers I couldn't find anything
strange. Funny thing is, for Chrome a bug has been solved to strip an extra
gz from downloaded files: [1]
[1]: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=58168
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Content-Encoding, License for .graffle file, Was: Fwd: [VOTE] Release
celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Florian Holeczek <fl...@holeczek.de>.
Hi all,
taking this out of the Celix vote thread in order to keep it tidy.
Sebb wrote:
> The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license.
In JSPWiki, we have a .graffle file, too. Although this is XML, I consider this a binary file, just like a JPEG image for example. It's the document format of Graffle, a graphics software for Mac OS X.
> I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release. Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn reviewers about the problen.
> Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes.
The problem underneath is: When the browser tells "Accept-Encoding gzip" in its HTTP request header, it can be that a .gz download gets gzipped again. Although the server correctly responses with "Content-Encoding gzip", the browser may not handle this download correctly and save it double gzipped to disk. So you end up with a file .tar.gz which in fact is a .tar.gz.gz format. Gunzipping this manually leads to the correct data.
So,
* there isn't any real data corruption and
* it seems to be at least not only the server part which is to blame here
Regards
Florian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi,
>
> I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release.
> Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn
> reviewers about the problen.
>
Agreed.
>
> Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes.
> The sig is OK.
> The hashes have an unusual format, which some tools may not be able to
> understand, but they do agree once this is allowed for.
>
Whats unusual about their format? I used [1] to generate the hashes. But if
for a next release this should be done different I'll know what to do.
> The NOTICE file says
>
> Copyright [2012] The Apache Software Foundation
>
> The [ and ] are not part of the standard format and should be removed.
>
> The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license.
>
> Otherwise the contents of the archive looks OK and seems to agree with SVN.
>
The graffle file is created by me but can be removed from the repository.
And the NOTICE file is a small change. Is it ok if this is done in SVN so
that we can accept this release? In other words, can we get a +1 on this?
Thanks!
[1]: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 29 October 2012 10:23, Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl> wrote:
> On Oct 27, 2012, at 17:26 , Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>> http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us.
>>
>> I've added the key to mit.edu as well.
>>
>> Concerning the download, I've changed the mime-type but that doesn't seem
>> to help. But since this is only the case when directly downloading from the
>> svn, and not the case when downloading from the actual staging areas later
>> on, I don't thinks this is a blocking problem.
>
> I had no problems downloading and verifying the release with "wget" (and similar issues when trying with Chrome) so I don't think it's a blocking issue with the release, but something infra can hopefully resolve.
>
>> Can someone please take another look at this?
>
> That would be nice, as people know, Celix only has two mentors at the moment (Karl and me) so we really need somebody else to review this release and/or sign up as an extra mentor.
>
>> Sebb: Can you please check it out again and if all looks good change your
>> vote? The mentioned problems aren't related to the artifact itself, and we
>> do like to get our first release out..
>
> Sebb?
Sorry, I've been away.
I agree that the download problem is not a blocker for the release.
Until it is fixed, I suggest adding a note to any vote e-mails to warn
reviewers about the problen.
Using wget, I was able to download the archive, sig and hashes.
The sig is OK.
The hashes have an unusual format, which some tools may not be able to
understand, but they do agree once this is allowed for.
The NOTICE file says
Copyright [2012] The Apache Software Foundation
The [ and ] are not part of the standard format and should be removed.
The file documents/Celix.graffle does not have a license.
Otherwise the contents of the archive looks OK and seems to agree with SVN.
> Greetings, Marcel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
On Oct 27, 2012, at 17:26 , Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>> http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us.
>
> I've added the key to mit.edu as well.
>
> Concerning the download, I've changed the mime-type but that doesn't seem
> to help. But since this is only the case when directly downloading from the
> svn, and not the case when downloading from the actual staging areas later
> on, I don't thinks this is a blocking problem.
I had no problems downloading and verifying the release with "wget" (and similar issues when trying with Chrome) so I don't think it's a blocking issue with the release, but something infra can hopefully resolve.
> Can someone please take another look at this?
That would be nice, as people know, Celix only has two mentors at the moment (Karl and me) so we really need somebody else to review this release and/or sign up as an extra mentor.
> Sebb: Can you please check it out again and if all looks good change your
> vote? The mentioned problems aren't related to the artifact itself, and we
> do like to get our first release out..
Sebb?
Greetings, Marcel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
> http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us.
>
I've added the key to mit.edu as well.
Concerning the download, I've changed the mime-type but that doesn't seem
to help. But since this is only the case when directly downloading from the
svn, and not the case when downloading from the actual staging areas later
on, I don't thinks this is a blocking problem.
Can someone please take another look at this?
Sebb: Can you please check it out again and if all looks good change your
vote? The mentioned problems aren't related to the artifact itself, and we
do like to get our first release out..
Thanks!
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Alexander Broekhuis
<a....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> -1
>>
>> The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers.
>>
>
> I've added the key to the pgp keyserver (http://keyserver.pgp.com/) when I
> created it. Searching via the key shows me the correct entry. Is there any
> other standard server I should add it?
http://pgp.mit.edu/ is a go-to place for most of us.
Thanks,
Roman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi Sebb,
Thanks for your replies, I forgot some of the links, see my remarks inline.
> Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release?
>
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/celix/tags/celix-0.0.1-incubating/
>
> Where is the KEYS file?
>
I followed what seemed to be the default schema in the new svn dist
structure;
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/KEYS
>
> -1
>
> The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers.
>
I've added the key to the pgp keyserver (http://keyserver.pgp.com/) when I
created it. Searching via the key shows me the correct entry. Is there any
other standard server I should add it?
>
> Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes
> have an unusual format.
>
> Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can
> extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file).
As you've found out already, this seems to be an INFRA issue with the SVN
server and downloaded artefacts. I hope INFRA can shed some light on this...
Does this information give enough information to re-evaluate this release?
Thanks again,
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 October 2012 13:57, Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi incubator people,
>
> I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix!
> The last few months we have been working on this release.
> Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required
> files into the correct place etc.
>
> This release has already been approved by our mentors and second committer:
> * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding)
> * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding)
> * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes)
> See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes
>
> As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another
> thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need
> one
> more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a
> look at this release
>
> The source release file and signatures can be found on:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/
Where is the release tag that corresponds with the release?
Where is the KEYS file?
-1
The key id (EB686AF9) is not available from the standard PGP servers.
Also the sig and hashes do not agree with the archive, and the hashes
have an unusual format.
Furthermore, the archive does not unpack correctly with WinZip (I can
extract the tar file, but WinZip cannot handle the tar file).
> Before voting please review the section,
> "What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?", at
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>
> Known issues:
> * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the "celix"
> directory, this is actually "celix-0.0.1-incubating"
> * The BUILDING file points to
> http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html
> this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next
> release.
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
See above; the dist artifacts are badly broken.
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> --
> With kind regards,
>
> Alexander Broekhuis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release celix-0.0.1-incubating
Posted by David Bosschaert <da...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non binding)
David
On Tuesday, 23 October 2012, Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi incubator people,
>
> I would like to start the vote for the first release of Celix!
> The last few months we have been working on this release.
> Most of the time went into cleaning up sources, getting the required
> files into the correct place etc.
>
> This release has already been approved by our mentors and second
committer:
> * Karl Pauls (pauls) (binding)
> * Marcel Offermans (marrs) (binding)
> * Pepijn Noltes (pnoltes)
> See http://incubator.markmail.org/thread/7fjrjduh7dtdzsdx for their votes
>
> As can be seen, we are currently one mentor short, I'll open another
> thread for finding a new mentor. But, for now, this means we at least need
> one
> more binding vote. So if anyone has some free cycles, please take a
> look at this release
>
> The source release file and signatures can be found on:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/celix/celix-0.0.1-incubating/
>
> Before voting please review the section,
> "What are the ASF requirements on approving a release?", at
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>
> Known issues:
> * The BUILDING file notes that the source can be found in the "celix"
> directory, this is actually "celix-0.0.1-incubating"
> * The BUILDING file points to
> http://incubator.apache.org/celix/subprojects.html
> this content will be placed in the BUILDING file itself for a next
> release.
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> --
> With kind regards,
>
> Alexander Broekhuis
>