You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@uima.apache.org by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> on 2014/04/22 18:03:35 UTC
[VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Hi,
I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
Changes:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
The Maven artifacts are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
The SVN tags are here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
and for the Eclipse Update Site:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
release candidates.
Please vote on release:
[ ] +1 OK to release
[ ] 0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
Thanks.
-Marshall
Re: [VOTE] [CANCELLED] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
Due to the bug Richard found, this vote is cancelled.
I'll roll back the version and prepare the next release.
Thanks for testing! -Marshall
On 4/22/2014 12:03 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
>
> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
>
> Changes:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
>
> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
>
> The Maven artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
>
> The SVN tags are here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
>
> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
>
> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
> release candidates.
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Marshall
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Jaroslaw Cwiklik <ui...@gmail.com>.
All testing done on linux:
1) spot checked signatures - OK
2) built from svn tag - OK
3) checked source LICENSE/NOTICE - OK
4) checked binary LICENSE/NOTICE - OK
5) Checked jira-report - OK
6) Launched RoomNumberAnnotator UIMA-AS service with the latest jars - OK
7) Ran UIMA-AS RunRemoteAsyncAE client to completion -OK
8) Ran documentAnalyzer - OK
[X] +1 OK to release
Jerry
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
> re UIMA-2463 - right, I remember discussing, and I meant to close it but
> forgot. I agree it's not a reason to block the release, but I'll fix if
> we do
> another rc.
>
> -Marshall
> On 4/23/2014 8:24 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> > compared svn-tag with source-release - OK
> > some projects in svn-tag contain a .project file:
> > uimaj-eclipse-feature-runtime, uimaj-eclipse-feature-tools,
> > uimaj-eclipse-update-site,
> >
> > remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install svn-tag - OK
> > remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install source-release - OK
> >
> > checked license/notice of source-release - OK
> > checked license/notice of binary-release - OK
> >
> > some javadoc artifacts contain a icon license but no icons, e.g.,
> > uimaj-ep-cas-editor-ide-2.6.0-javadoc
> >
> > installed uima features in kepler sr1 - OK
> > created descriptor - OK
> > installed and tested UIMA Ruta Workbench 2.2.0 - OK
> >
> > built current trunk of ruta with staged artifacts - OK
> >
> > UIMA-2463 is not included in the jira report, I didn't resolved it,
> > sorry. It's unproblematic and can maybe integrated in case a new RC is
> > created since the issue is actually solved in the code.
> >
> > ... all testing performed on a windows machine (Windows 7, 64Bit).
> >
> > [X] +1 OK to release
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > Am 22.04.2014 18:03, schrieb Marshall Schor:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
> >>
> >> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling
> exploitation of multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump
> from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
> >>
> >> Changes:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
> >>
> >> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
> >>
> >> The Maven artifacts are here:
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
> >>
> >> The SVN tags are here:
> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
> >>
> >> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
> >>
> >> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how
> to test
> >> release candidates.
> >>
> >> Please vote on release:
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 OK to release
> >> [ ] 0 Don't care
> >> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> -Marshall
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
re UIMA-2463 - right, I remember discussing, and I meant to close it but
forgot. I agree it's not a reason to block the release, but I'll fix if we do
another rc.
-Marshall
On 4/23/2014 8:24 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> compared svn-tag with source-release - OK
> some projects in svn-tag contain a .project file:
> uimaj-eclipse-feature-runtime, uimaj-eclipse-feature-tools,
> uimaj-eclipse-update-site,
>
> remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install svn-tag - OK
> remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install source-release - OK
>
> checked license/notice of source-release - OK
> checked license/notice of binary-release - OK
>
> some javadoc artifacts contain a icon license but no icons, e.g.,
> uimaj-ep-cas-editor-ide-2.6.0-javadoc
>
> installed uima features in kepler sr1 - OK
> created descriptor - OK
> installed and tested UIMA Ruta Workbench 2.2.0 - OK
>
> built current trunk of ruta with staged artifacts - OK
>
> UIMA-2463 is not included in the jira report, I didn't resolved it,
> sorry. It's unproblematic and can maybe integrated in case a new RC is
> created since the issue is actually solved in the code.
>
> ... all testing performed on a windows machine (Windows 7, 64Bit).
>
> [X] +1 OK to release
>
> Peter
>
> Am 22.04.2014 18:03, schrieb Marshall Schor:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
>>
>> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
>>
>> Changes:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
>>
>> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
>> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
>>
>> The Maven artifacts are here:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
>>
>> The SVN tags are here:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
>>
>> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
>>
>> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
>> release candidates.
>>
>> Please vote on release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -Marshall
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Peter Klügl <pk...@uni-wuerzburg.de>.
compared svn-tag with source-release - OK
some projects in svn-tag contain a .project file:
uimaj-eclipse-feature-runtime, uimaj-eclipse-feature-tools,
uimaj-eclipse-update-site,
remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install svn-tag - OK
remove .m2 uima dir and mvn clean install source-release - OK
checked license/notice of source-release - OK
checked license/notice of binary-release - OK
some javadoc artifacts contain a icon license but no icons, e.g.,
uimaj-ep-cas-editor-ide-2.6.0-javadoc
installed uima features in kepler sr1 - OK
created descriptor - OK
installed and tested UIMA Ruta Workbench 2.2.0 - OK
built current trunk of ruta with staged artifacts - OK
UIMA-2463 is not included in the jira report, I didn't resolved it,
sorry. It's unproblematic and can maybe integrated in case a new RC is
created since the issue is actually solved in the code.
... all testing performed on a windows machine (Windows 7, 64Bit).
[X] +1 OK to release
Peter
Am 22.04.2014 18:03, schrieb Marshall Schor:
> Hi,
>
> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
>
> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
>
> Changes:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
>
> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
>
> The Maven artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
>
> The SVN tags are here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
>
> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
>
> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
> release candidates.
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Marshall
>
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
On 24.04.2014, at 10:56, Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org> wrote:
> upgraded uimaFIT to new SDK and tested build: FAIL
> - Most of the unit tests on combining CPEs with external resources fail
>
> [X] -1 Not OK to release, because of test case failures in uimaFIT
>
> I will investigate the reason for these failures and report back as soon as possible.
Apparently some AE descriptors are serialized incompletely to XML when UIMA 2.6.0 RC 1
is used.
Investigating further...
-- Richard
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
On 4/24/2014 8:13 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> That's a question for Marshall :-)
>
> I think the update site is not part of the normal build, but
> successfully building the update site is probably a requirement of an
> RC. So, it's not covered by mvn install on trunk.
+1. I think it's a matter of recording the configuration info used to produce
the update site. It's not really needed for review I guess.
> I haven't added a link
> to the ruta update site source, but maybe should have.
+0
-Marshall
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Peter Klügl <pk...@uni-wuerzburg.de>.
That's a question for Marshall :-)
I think the update site is not part of the normal build, but
successfully building the update site is probably a requirement of an
RC. So, it's not covered by mvn install on trunk. I haven't added a link
to the ruta update site source, but maybe should have.
Peter
Am 24.04.2014 14:09, schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> Ok, but why is it mentioned separately? Is there anything in particular to see/check at the SVN tag for the update site?
>
> -- Richard
>
> On 24.04.2014, at 13:55, Peter Klügl <pk...@uni-wuerzburg.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 24.04.2014 10:56, schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> -- Richard
>>>
>>> P.S.: The Eclipse update site in the mail pointed to the SVN, not to an actual update site. Maybe intentional, but I do not understand why.
>> That's the svn-tag for the update site, I think. The actual update site
>> is mentioned earlier with the binary and source release.
>>
>> Peter
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
Ok, but why is it mentioned separately? Is there anything in particular to see/check at the SVN tag for the update site?
-- Richard
On 24.04.2014, at 13:55, Peter Klügl <pk...@uni-wuerzburg.de> wrote:
> Am 24.04.2014 10:56, schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>> ...
>>
>> -- Richard
>>
>> P.S.: The Eclipse update site in the mail pointed to the SVN, not to an actual update site. Maybe intentional, but I do not understand why.
>
> That's the svn-tag for the update site, I think. The actual update site
> is mentioned earlier with the binary and source release.
>
> Peter
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Peter Klügl <pk...@uni-wuerzburg.de>.
Am 24.04.2014 10:56, schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> ...
>
> -- Richard
>
> P.S.: The Eclipse update site in the mail pointed to the SVN, not to an actual update site. Maybe intentional, but I do not understand why.
That's the svn-tag for the update site, I think. The actual update site
is mentioned earlier with the binary and source release.
Peter
> P.P.S.: Do we need to sign out votes now? ... GPG says the signature on your vote is invalid
>
> On 22.04.2014, at 21:00, Marshall Schor <sc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Signed PGP part
>> signatures OK
>>
>> install into Eclipse 4.3.2. - OK
>>
>> compare source-release w/ svn tag - OK
>>
>> build-from-source -OK
>>
>> license check - source- OK, bin - OK, jar spot check: OK
>>
>> Jira-report: OK
>>
>> Javadocs format looks OK
>>
>> did "adjust sample paths", ran documentAnalyzer - OK
>>
>> [X] +1 OK to release
>>
>> -Marshall Schor
>>
>> On 4/22/2014 12:03 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
>>>
>>> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of
>> multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
>>> Changes:
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
>>> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
>>> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
>>>
>>> The Maven artifacts are here:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
>>>
>>> The SVN tags are here:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
>>>
>>> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
>>>
>>> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
>>> release candidates.
>>>
>>> Please vote on release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> -Marshall
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
On 4/24/2014 4:56 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> build from source zip on Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_51-b13) - OK
>
> JAR in binary zip: OK
> - Licenses in place, look ok
>
> Signature of some files checked: OK
>
> Javadoc: OK
>
> build from source zip on Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0-b132) - non-critical
> - javadoc stuff
>
> jira report - non-critical
> - says "${project.verson}"
That seems to be some issue with the maven changes plugin.
>
> binary zip: non-critital
> - NOTICE file says "Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation". Shouldn't new releases have at least an up-to-date year there? I remember getting a mail early this year from Apache reminding about updating the year in copyright notices. The NOTICE files in the JARs say "Copyright 2006-2014 The Apache Software Foundation".
The copyright dates: there are 1 or 2. If there is 1, it is supposed to be the
earliest date. There was some discussion in the mailing list about just using 1
date. I chose that approach to avoid having the 2nd date be wrong.
>
> upgraded uimaFIT to new SDK and tested build: FAIL
> - Most of the unit tests on combining CPEs with external resources fail
>
> [X] -1 Not OK to release, because of test case failures in uimaFIT
>
> I will investigate the reason for these failures and report back as soon as possible.
Great! good catch...
> -- Richard
>
> P.S.: The Eclipse update site in the mail pointed to the SVN, not to an actual update site. Maybe intentional, but I do not understand why.
Sorry, should be more clear - that's just a record of the state of the
update-site-project as of the time it was run for packaging the update site.
The real update site is in the same people.a.o/~schor ... spot.
>
> P.P.S.: Do we need to sign out votes now? ... GPG says the signature on your vote is invalid
We don't need to sign. However, I was experimenting. I think what happened
(and it's happened before), is I sent this from my apache.org address, and that
address isn't set up to be allowed to the uima dev list (!), so it went into the
moderation queue. I suspect that when it got moderated through, some header or
?? was updated, and this invalidated the signature.
-Marshall
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
build from source zip on Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_51-b13) - OK
JAR in binary zip: OK
- Licenses in place, look ok
Signature of some files checked: OK
Javadoc: OK
build from source zip on Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0-b132) - non-critical
- javadoc stuff
jira report - non-critical
- says "${project.verson}"
binary zip: non-critital
- NOTICE file says "Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation". Shouldn't new releases have at least an up-to-date year there? I remember getting a mail early this year from Apache reminding about updating the year in copyright notices. The NOTICE files in the JARs say "Copyright 2006-2014 The Apache Software Foundation".
upgraded uimaFIT to new SDK and tested build: FAIL
- Most of the unit tests on combining CPEs with external resources fail
[X] -1 Not OK to release, because of test case failures in uimaFIT
I will investigate the reason for these failures and report back as soon as possible.
-- Richard
P.S.: The Eclipse update site in the mail pointed to the SVN, not to an actual update site. Maybe intentional, but I do not understand why.
P.P.S.: Do we need to sign out votes now? ... GPG says the signature on your vote is invalid
On 22.04.2014, at 21:00, Marshall Schor <sc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
> signatures OK
>
> install into Eclipse 4.3.2. - OK
>
> compare source-release w/ svn tag - OK
>
> build-from-source -OK
>
> license check - source- OK, bin - OK, jar spot check: OK
>
> Jira-report: OK
>
> Javadocs format looks OK
>
> did "adjust sample paths", ran documentAnalyzer - OK
>
> [X] +1 OK to release
>
> -Marshall Schor
>
> On 4/22/2014 12:03 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
> >
> > This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of
> multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
> >
> > Changes:
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
> >
> > The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
> > http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
> >
> > The Maven artifacts are here:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
> >
> > The SVN tags are here:
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
> >
> > and for the Eclipse Update Site:
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
> >
> > See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
> > release candidates.
> >
> > Please vote on release:
> >
> > [ ] +1 OK to release
> > [ ] 0 Don't care
> > [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Marshall
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA Java SDK 2.6.0 rc1
Posted by Marshall Schor <sc...@apache.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
signatures OK
install into Eclipse 4.3.2. - OK
compare source-release w/ svn tag - OK
build-from-source -OK
license check - source- OK, bin - OK, jar spot check: OK
Jira-report: OK
Javadocs format looks OK
did "adjust sample paths", ran documentAnalyzer - OK
[X] +1 OK to release
- -Marshall Schor
On 4/22/2014 12:03 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've posted the UIMAJ SDK 2.6.0 rc1 release candidate.
>
> This version has lots of changes mainly related to enabling exploitation of
multi-core processors, and requires Java 6 (hence the bump from 2.5.0 to 2.6.0).
>
> Changes:
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-3764?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.0SDK%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
>
> The source and binary zip/tars and the Eclipse update site are staged to
> http://people.apache.org/~schor/uima-release-candidates/uimaj-2.6.0-rc1/
>
> The Maven artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1017/
>
> The SVN tags are here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-2.6.0/
>
> and for the Eclipse Update Site:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/uimaj/tags/uimaj-eclipse-update-site-2.6.0/
>
> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
> release candidates.
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Marshall
>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTVrxJAAoJEHMl+QLhMDqZu6EQAOazVdlpcrUzO61/xUzbVMeD
Y6/g2z5edRn9d5XzL2Kka+kSTdLDb8mFBiTxUljgB8GTfBUbjKTuU6xuhzj1qc6r
/DZ5xEQmhQH4DWh8SmhClQl2U2NI29yg6/kqD/B0/lRkwF7k7+JJ1lH8mYaZOXVV
0z0+DTLA8y/yRqmlehSEi+Z3tEwTyiJZMvqYSNuMAnYYgS/qWzpH2BE2EToz0GtP
h2YoxklQG8/wxlzoK/VDrCTPaknvrSgvkYWtB1swskkDZOfIcxWxBw/cEp+LafVs
KrfbAIAlpH9yvXw69iftN9FnfjCwCMtbUd4JV2np4LoInNcrcy6kJIAPt6Iq0luK
lyuQqTwTGgo2JC/DL5YHF/zr8nmZ9jYgNq1wyrx6/YObMoj329HrjwknTSNst8NM
xEoM5/jjmrCq5w1RyUod8RNY3Igu0rwzkLBBXr6+S6hnegW/oIROwjh008noW8ob
WnypkQxFmOeRdu1t882Cub7dxirWN7KiFs/06Pd3UcIZW0rre3MZgdMJ2RA1PfpB
tQ6763nakL/1c28wXKPAu5tEvFk+ddiCkrIruuZH7a0m2kGC9iRHTvf+CKPdgQqY
X7u5A9AyvRAE5RX3tvmapzGkH04oQJ9eDMBYW3+E8ibZZaLwyTps9VoVn6fl7Axf
5YwBQ0W+J6g0XdPbl4dB
=/9/2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----