You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@trafficserver.apache.org by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> on 2010/04/23 06:34:30 UTC
[VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Hi all,
I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate. Please
take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test it,
verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release candidate.
Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported. When you are
done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on 4/28/2010,
assuming no issues are found.
http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2851995 Apr 23 04:22 trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 23 04:22
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 23 04:22
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 23 04:22
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
SHA1: c5625a55fd3ca30a7a915aa8ead76f7e1b2624ab trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
MD5: a271265c430c1f1e51a91f280fa4513c trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
Thanks!
-- leif
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Jason <ja...@gmail.com>.
Totally right. Just checked the ts site now and saw the instructions are
pointing to the svn readme. This is a good candidate for a wiki page.
I can put up a nice chart with the various operating systems i'll be
checking with versions on that wiki.
How far back do we want to go with distro releases?
- Jason
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:56 PM, John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> I think a FAQ/Release nodes on the web site is the way
> to go. There are bound to be a lot of weird system
> compatibility issues when it goes into the wild and
> it would be best to have them all in a single place that
> we can update without changing the package.
>
> john
>
>
> On 4/23/2010 10:49 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> > On 04/23/2010 11:00 AM, John Plevyak wrote:
> >> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
> >> on a clean VM.
> >>
> >
> > Do we want to try to cover all this in the README / INSTALL documents
> > for 2.0.x? The "trunk" has better versions of these documents, but I
> > didn't want to backport that (since lots of other things have changed
> too).
> >
> > Can we get away with documenting the install instructions on the Wiki
> > (some of it is already there, might just have to be updated), and then
> > make sure the INSTALL file on trunk reflects all the information from
> > the Wiki?
> >
> > If not, we'll need to spend some time to update the INSTALL document for
> > 2.0.x branch as well, and prepare a new package candidate.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -- Leif
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
I think a FAQ/Release nodes on the web site is the way
to go. There are bound to be a lot of weird system
compatibility issues when it goes into the wild and
it would be best to have them all in a single place that
we can update without changing the package.
john
On 4/23/2010 10:49 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 04/23/2010 11:00 AM, John Plevyak wrote:
>> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
>> on a clean VM.
>>
>
> Do we want to try to cover all this in the README / INSTALL documents
> for 2.0.x? The "trunk" has better versions of these documents, but I
> didn't want to backport that (since lots of other things have changed too).
>
> Can we get away with documenting the install instructions on the Wiki
> (some of it is already there, might just have to be updated), and then
> make sure the INSTALL file on trunk reflects all the information from
> the Wiki?
>
> If not, we'll need to spend some time to update the INSTALL document for
> 2.0.x branch as well, and prepare a new package candidate.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -- Leif
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
On 04/23/2010 11:00 AM, John Plevyak wrote:
> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
> on a clean VM.
>
Do we want to try to cover all this in the README / INSTALL documents
for 2.0.x? The "trunk" has better versions of these documents, but I
didn't want to backport that (since lots of other things have changed too).
Can we get away with documenting the install instructions on the Wiki
(some of it is already there, might just have to be updated), and then
make sure the INSTALL file on trunk reflects all the information from
the Wiki?
If not, we'll need to spend some time to update the INSTALL document for
2.0.x branch as well, and prepare a new package candidate.
Thoughts?
-- Leif
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Jason <ja...@gmail.com>.
yeah there are still paths that need checking (gota work on that). I can
work on the script to make sure it works on 8.04 and perhaps i can also do a
10.00 test. I do prefer LTS on dedicated but admit I've been focusing on
9.10 for EC2. Other than the script, did the build work using the sqlite3
packages on 8.04?
Some info on the script for anyone wanting to know, there are a lot of users
on EC2 which don't have a clue how to use Linux much (many migrate from
Windows for the cost savings). My goal was to make it as easy as apt-get
for those users.
Think your way to advance for this script JP ;-)
basically when you freshBuild, it pulls source into /mnt/trafficserver (/mnt
on ec2 is where your instance storage beings).
forceBuild needs to have the source there (at the location freshBuild puts
it) to start. (I will fix the hanging part)
if you do downloaded the source outside the install script you can change
the locations in the script to the svn tree you pulled down, thats probably
what hanged on your system. I hope :-P
EC2_EPHEMERAL=/your dir
PROJECT=/sub folder where configure
SVN_LOC=/thee three
ultimately configure runs in the path pointed to FULL_BUILD_PATH:
FULL_BUILD_PATH=$EC2_EPHEMERAL/$PROJECT/$SVN_LOC
If you just want to see the configure options, they will be displayed
as soon as you run the script. Those options get passed directly to
configure.
autoreconf -i --force
./configure $CONFIGURE_OPTIONS
Does a make/install after that which is pretty much all the script does.
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:40 PM, John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> Tried it. The script was a bit confusing since it seemed to hang
> and I thought it might be doing something. Figured out that
> I wanted to give it forceBuild, did that and then it failed with:
>
> ldconfig deferred processing now taking place
> Can't find /mnt/trafficserver/traffic-trunk.svn, cannot continue!
>
> This is on another fresh Ubuntu 8.04 LTS
>
> It seems to want me to have pulled a fresh tree, but I just
> want to use the source code I downloaded.
>
> john
>
>
> On 4/23/2010 10:15 AM, Jason wrote:
> > JP,
> >
> > This works for 9.10.
> >
> > See my contrib scripts which are used for EC2. They should generally
> work
> > for dedicated, and at one time I did a test with 8.04. Can you double
> check
> > your recompile with these?
> >
> > Note: I just checked hardy's package repo and libdb-dev and sqlite3-dev
> do
> > exist.
> >
> > apt-get update
> > apt-get install -y g++ autoconf \
> > make \
> > libtool \
> > libssl-dev \
> > tcl-dev \
> > libexpat1-dev \
> > libdb-dev \
> > libpcre3-dev \
> > libsqlite3-dev \
> > libdb-dev
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:00 PM, John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
> >> on a clean VM.
> >>
> >> I needed to install libexpat1-dev instead of libexpat-dev
> >> (we could make a note in the README or online FAQ).
> >>
> >> I tried straight configure but it failed because sqlite
> >> on this version is 3.4.2 and sqlite3_open_v2 is not supported
> >> in that version. No package exists for sqlite3 3.5 for
> >> this version of the OS. The error message:
> >>
> >> configure: error: check for sqlite3 failed. Have you installed
> >> sqlite3-devel?
> >>
> >> was confusing since I did have sqlite3-devel installed.
> >>
> >> Given that SQLite is in the public domain
> >> we could just include the single file in the TS source
> >> tree and use that instead of making it a dependency.
> >>
> >> I tried:
> >>
> >> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
> >>
> >> which interestingly enough did not have a problem
> >> in configure, but reported:
> >>
> >> SimpleDBM.h:140: error: 'DEFAULT_DB_IMPLEMENTATION' was not declared in
> >> this scope
> >>
> >> During compile.
> >>
> >> I finally got it to work with:
> >>
> >> apt-get install libdb-dev
> >> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
> >>
> >> Again we might want to put in the README or online FAQ.
> >>
> >> I am not sure if any of these should be reported as bugs
> >> but I think there is room for improvement :)
> >>
> >> john
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/22/2010 9:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate.
> Please
> >>> take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test it,
> >>> verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release candidate.
> >>> Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported. When you are
> >>> done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on 4/28/2010,
> >>> assuming no issues are found.
> >>>
> >>> http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
> >>>
> >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2851995 Apr 23 04:22
> >>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 23 04:22
> >>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
> >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 23 04:22
> >>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
> >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 23 04:22
> >>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
> >>>
> >>> SHA1: c5625a55fd3ca30a7a915aa8ead76f7e1b2624ab
> >> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> >>> MD5: a271265c430c1f1e51a91f280fa4513c trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> -- leif
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
Tried it. The script was a bit confusing since it seemed to hang
and I thought it might be doing something. Figured out that
I wanted to give it forceBuild, did that and then it failed with:
ldconfig deferred processing now taking place
Can't find /mnt/trafficserver/traffic-trunk.svn, cannot continue!
This is on another fresh Ubuntu 8.04 LTS
It seems to want me to have pulled a fresh tree, but I just
want to use the source code I downloaded.
john
On 4/23/2010 10:15 AM, Jason wrote:
> JP,
>
> This works for 9.10.
>
> See my contrib scripts which are used for EC2. They should generally work
> for dedicated, and at one time I did a test with 8.04. Can you double check
> your recompile with these?
>
> Note: I just checked hardy's package repo and libdb-dev and sqlite3-dev do
> exist.
>
> apt-get update
> apt-get install -y g++ autoconf \
> make \
> libtool \
> libssl-dev \
> tcl-dev \
> libexpat1-dev \
> libdb-dev \
> libpcre3-dev \
> libsqlite3-dev \
> libdb-dev
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:00 PM, John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
>> on a clean VM.
>>
>> I needed to install libexpat1-dev instead of libexpat-dev
>> (we could make a note in the README or online FAQ).
>>
>> I tried straight configure but it failed because sqlite
>> on this version is 3.4.2 and sqlite3_open_v2 is not supported
>> in that version. No package exists for sqlite3 3.5 for
>> this version of the OS. The error message:
>>
>> configure: error: check for sqlite3 failed. Have you installed
>> sqlite3-devel?
>>
>> was confusing since I did have sqlite3-devel installed.
>>
>> Given that SQLite is in the public domain
>> we could just include the single file in the TS source
>> tree and use that instead of making it a dependency.
>>
>> I tried:
>>
>> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
>>
>> which interestingly enough did not have a problem
>> in configure, but reported:
>>
>> SimpleDBM.h:140: error: 'DEFAULT_DB_IMPLEMENTATION' was not declared in
>> this scope
>>
>> During compile.
>>
>> I finally got it to work with:
>>
>> apt-get install libdb-dev
>> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
>>
>> Again we might want to put in the README or online FAQ.
>>
>> I am not sure if any of these should be reported as bugs
>> but I think there is room for improvement :)
>>
>> john
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/22/2010 9:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate. Please
>>> take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test it,
>>> verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release candidate.
>>> Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported. When you are
>>> done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on 4/28/2010,
>>> assuming no issues are found.
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
>>>
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2851995 Apr 23 04:22
>>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 23 04:22
>>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 23 04:22
>>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 23 04:22
>>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
>>>
>>> SHA1: c5625a55fd3ca30a7a915aa8ead76f7e1b2624ab
>> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
>>> MD5: a271265c430c1f1e51a91f280fa4513c trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -- leif
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Jason <ja...@gmail.com>.
JP,
This works for 9.10.
See my contrib scripts which are used for EC2. They should generally work
for dedicated, and at one time I did a test with 8.04. Can you double check
your recompile with these?
Note: I just checked hardy's package repo and libdb-dev and sqlite3-dev do
exist.
apt-get update
apt-get install -y g++ autoconf \
make \
libtool \
libssl-dev \
tcl-dev \
libexpat1-dev \
libdb-dev \
libpcre3-dev \
libsqlite3-dev \
libdb-dev
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:00 PM, John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
> on a clean VM.
>
> I needed to install libexpat1-dev instead of libexpat-dev
> (we could make a note in the README or online FAQ).
>
> I tried straight configure but it failed because sqlite
> on this version is 3.4.2 and sqlite3_open_v2 is not supported
> in that version. No package exists for sqlite3 3.5 for
> this version of the OS. The error message:
>
> configure: error: check for sqlite3 failed. Have you installed
> sqlite3-devel?
>
> was confusing since I did have sqlite3-devel installed.
>
> Given that SQLite is in the public domain
> we could just include the single file in the TS source
> tree and use that instead of making it a dependency.
>
> I tried:
>
> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
>
> which interestingly enough did not have a problem
> in configure, but reported:
>
> SimpleDBM.h:140: error: 'DEFAULT_DB_IMPLEMENTATION' was not declared in
> this scope
>
> During compile.
>
> I finally got it to work with:
>
> apt-get install libdb-dev
> configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
>
> Again we might want to put in the README or online FAQ.
>
> I am not sure if any of these should be reported as bugs
> but I think there is room for improvement :)
>
> john
>
>
>
> On 4/22/2010 9:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate. Please
> > take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test it,
> > verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release candidate.
> > Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported. When you are
> > done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on 4/28/2010,
> > assuming no issues are found.
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
> >
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2851995 Apr 23 04:22
> > trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 23 04:22
> > trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 23 04:22
> > trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 23 04:22
> > trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
> >
> > SHA1: c5625a55fd3ca30a7a915aa8ead76f7e1b2624ab
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> > MD5: a271265c430c1f1e51a91f280fa4513c trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -- leif
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
Here is my experience on a Ubuntu 8.04LTS (Hardy Heron)
on a clean VM.
I needed to install libexpat1-dev instead of libexpat-dev
(we could make a note in the README or online FAQ).
I tried straight configure but it failed because sqlite
on this version is 3.4.2 and sqlite3_open_v2 is not supported
in that version. No package exists for sqlite3 3.5 for
this version of the OS. The error message:
configure: error: check for sqlite3 failed. Have you installed
sqlite3-devel?
was confusing since I did have sqlite3-devel installed.
Given that SQLite is in the public domain
we could just include the single file in the TS source
tree and use that instead of making it a dependency.
I tried:
configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
which interestingly enough did not have a problem
in configure, but reported:
SimpleDBM.h:140: error: 'DEFAULT_DB_IMPLEMENTATION' was not declared in
this scope
During compile.
I finally got it to work with:
apt-get install libdb-dev
configure --without-sqlite3 --with-libdb
Again we might want to put in the README or online FAQ.
I am not sure if any of these should be reported as bugs
but I think there is room for improvement :)
john
On 4/22/2010 9:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate. Please
> take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test it,
> verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release candidate.
> Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported. When you are
> done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on 4/28/2010,
> assuming no issues are found.
>
> http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2851995 Apr 23 04:22
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 23 04:22
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 23 04:22
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 23 04:22
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
>
> SHA1: c5625a55fd3ca30a7a915aa8ead76f7e1b2624ab trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> MD5: a271265c430c1f1e51a91f280fa4513c trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- leif
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <le...@ogre.com>.
On 04/23/2010 04:44 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
> That code is now from Bind 9.5.2-P2 which has different license.
>
>
> I can make the changes in the trunk and 2.0.X... does this warrant
> rebuilding the release package?
>
I think so, I can respin it tonight.
Thanks for fixing this John, and good catch Miles!
-- Leif
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
On further inspection it seems that while this is the overall
copyright, the particular file in question has an additional
copyright which includes the offending clause.
However we have the legal right to remove that clause as per:
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change
via wikipedia
I have done so on the files in question in both the 2.0.X line and
the trunk.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
john
On 4/23/2010 3:44 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
> That code is now from Bind 9.5.2-P2 which has different license.
>
> Unfortunately it seems that the code in the repo has the old
> license still on it.
>
> The correct license is
>
> Copyright (C) 2004-2009 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC")
> Copyright (C) 1996-2003 Internet Software Consortium.
>
> Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any
> purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
> copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.
>
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND ISC DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH
> REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY
> AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL ISC BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT,
> INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM
> LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE
> OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR
> PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
>
> $Id: COPYRIGHT,v 1.13.130.2 2009/01/05 23:46:51 tbox Exp $
>
> Portions Copyright (C) 1996-2001 Nominum, Inc.
>
> Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any
> purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
> copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.
>
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND NOMINUM DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES
> WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
> MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL NOMINUM BE LIABLE FOR
> ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES
> WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN
> ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT
> OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
>
>
> Or more precisely the subset of the above on the particular files.
>
> I can make the changes in the trunk and 2.0.X... does this warrant
> rebuilding the release package?
>
> john
>
>
>
> On 4/23/2010 3:21 PM, Miles Libbey wrote:
>> Did we do anything with
>> libinktomi++/ink_res_init.cc and
>> libinktomi++/ink_res_mkquery.cc
>> In the initial checkins they were flagged with BSD code (but with the
>> advertising clause in the license).
>> miles
>>
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/22/2010 10:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate.
>>>> Please take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test
>>>> it, verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release
>>>> candidate. Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported.
>>>> When you are done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on
>>>> 4/28/2010, assuming no issues are found.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the comments so far are good, and we've already updated the Wiki
>>> significantly (please make more updates to the Wiki pages as you test on
>>> other Linux platforms, or with trunk, any Unix platforms). I will take
>>> it upon myself of updating the README and INSTALL files on trunk with
>>> the relevant information from the Wiki.
>>>
>>> That much said, I still think the canddiate is in a "shippable"
>>> condition. So, a +1 from me.
>>>
>>> -- Leif
>>>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by George Paul <ge...@apache.org>.
Okay tested pkg sigs and TS on Ubuntu 9.04 and no issues.
+1 for this latest RC.
-George
On 4/23/10 8:06 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 04/23/2010 07:38 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>>
>> Regarding the copyright change. Since the code
>> didn't change if we need the copyright changes then
>> we should just be able to rebuild the package and release
>> if we get the vote.
>>
>
> A new set of files are on
>
> http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 24 02:53
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 24 02:53
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2852645 Apr 24 02:53
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> -rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 24 02:53
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
>
>
> Checksums:
>
> MD5: 4c000131b19bdda05f1f21c6ae0547af trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
> SHA1: 45b4a0b1e8f2917a1b0ee972ed214daf4d946309
> trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
>
>
> These packages should include John's changes (please verify), and I also
> added a link to the "Build" on the CWiki to the INSTALL file.
>
> Consider this the new candidate, there should be no other changes than
> those mentioned.
>
> -- leif
>
> P.s
>
> These are the two merged changesets from 2.0.x that are in this new
> release candidate:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=937578&view=rev
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=937581&view=rev
>
> Note: the 2.0.0 release candidate is built off tags/2.0.0 in SVN, which
> is why I had to merge these two changes on to that tag. I know it might
> be frowned upon to merge onto a tag, but until we have the candidate
> frozen, it's easier to just merge any 2.0.x branch changes onto the
> 2.0.0 tag (this is actually a feature I like in SVN). If someone feels
> strongly about that, and suggest we make another tag in a situation like
> this, just suggest such a "rule".
>
> Of course, once 2.0.0 is released, the 2.0.0 tag should be considered
> untouchable. Is there a way to make it read-only? :)
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
On 04/23/2010 07:38 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
> Regarding the copyright change. Since the code
> didn't change if we need the copyright changes then
> we should just be able to rebuild the package and release
> if we get the vote.
>
A new set of files are on
http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 70 Apr 24 02:53
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.sha1
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 62 Apr 24 02:53
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.md5
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 2852645 Apr 24 02:53 trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 zwoop zwoop 836 Apr 24 02:53
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2.asc
Checksums:
MD5: 4c000131b19bdda05f1f21c6ae0547af trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
SHA1: 45b4a0b1e8f2917a1b0ee972ed214daf4d946309
trafficserver-2.0.0.tar.bz2
These packages should include John's changes (please verify), and I also
added a link to the "Build" on the CWiki to the INSTALL file.
Consider this the new candidate, there should be no other changes than
those mentioned.
-- leif
P.s
These are the two merged changesets from 2.0.x that are in this new
release candidate:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=937578&view=rev
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=937581&view=rev
Note: the 2.0.0 release candidate is built off tags/2.0.0 in SVN, which
is why I had to merge these two changes on to that tag. I know it might
be frowned upon to merge onto a tag, but until we have the candidate
frozen, it's easier to just merge any 2.0.x branch changes onto the
2.0.0 tag (this is actually a feature I like in SVN). If someone feels
strongly about that, and suggest we make another tag in a situation like
this, just suggest such a "rule".
Of course, once 2.0.0 is released, the 2.0.0 tag should be considered
untouchable. Is there a way to make it read-only? :)
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
Regarding the copyright change. Since the code
didn't change if we need the copyright changes then
we should just be able to rebuild the package and release
if we get the vote.
+1 to release either way
john
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by John Plevyak <jp...@acm.org>.
That code is now from Bind 9.5.2-P2 which has different license.
Unfortunately it seems that the code in the repo has the old
license still on it.
The correct license is
Copyright (C) 2004-2009 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC")
Copyright (C) 1996-2003 Internet Software Consortium.
Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any
purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND ISC DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH
REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY
AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL ISC BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT,
INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM
LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE
OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR
PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
$Id: COPYRIGHT,v 1.13.130.2 2009/01/05 23:46:51 tbox Exp $
Portions Copyright (C) 1996-2001 Nominum, Inc.
Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any
purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND NOMINUM DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES
WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL NOMINUM BE LIABLE FOR
ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES
WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN
ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT
OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
Or more precisely the subset of the above on the particular files.
I can make the changes in the trunk and 2.0.X... does this warrant
rebuilding the release package?
john
On 4/23/2010 3:21 PM, Miles Libbey wrote:
> Did we do anything with
> libinktomi++/ink_res_init.cc and
> libinktomi++/ink_res_mkquery.cc
> In the initial checkins they were flagged with BSD code (but with the
> advertising clause in the license).
> miles
>
>
> On Apr 23, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
>> On 04/22/2010 10:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate.
>>> Please take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test
>>> it, verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release
>>> candidate. Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported.
>>> When you are done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on
>>> 4/28/2010, assuming no issues are found.
>>
>>
>> I think the comments so far are good, and we've already updated the Wiki
>> significantly (please make more updates to the Wiki pages as you test on
>> other Linux platforms, or with trunk, any Unix platforms). I will take
>> it upon myself of updating the README and INSTALL files on trunk with
>> the relevant information from the Wiki.
>>
>> That much said, I still think the canddiate is in a "shippable"
>> condition. So, a +1 from me.
>>
>> -- Leif
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Miles Libbey <ml...@apache.org>.
Did we do anything with
libinktomi++/ink_res_init.cc and
libinktomi++/ink_res_mkquery.cc
In the initial checkins they were flagged with BSD code (but with the
advertising clause in the license).
miles
On Apr 23, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 04/22/2010 10:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate.
>> Please take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test
>> it, verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release
>> candidate. Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported.
>> When you are done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on
>> 4/28/2010, assuming no issues are found.
>
>
> I think the comments so far are good, and we've already updated the
> Wiki
> significantly (please make more updates to the Wiki pages as you
> test on
> other Linux platforms, or with trunk, any Unix platforms). I will take
> it upon myself of updating the README and INSTALL files on trunk with
> the relevant information from the Wiki.
>
> That much said, I still think the canddiate is in a "shippable"
> condition. So, a +1 from me.
>
> -- Leif
>
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for ATS v2.0.0
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
On 04/22/2010 10:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've prepared a package (and sigs) for a 2.0.0 release candidate.
> Please take a look at it, check STATUS/README/CHANGES, build and test
> it, verify the sigs, basically, make sure it's a solid release
> candidate. Since this is a 2.0.x release, only Linux is supported.
> When you are done, cast your +/-/0 votes, I'm aiming for a release on
> 4/28/2010, assuming no issues are found.
I think the comments so far are good, and we've already updated the Wiki
significantly (please make more updates to the Wiki pages as you test on
other Linux platforms, or with trunk, any Unix platforms). I will take
it upon myself of updating the README and INSTALL files on trunk with
the relevant information from the Wiki.
That much said, I still think the canddiate is in a "shippable"
condition. So, a +1 from me.
-- Leif