You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2014/11/17 10:59:43 UTC

[VOTE] Release Apache Flex Tool API 1.0.0 RC3

Hi,

I just dropped the RC2 staging repo and created a new one RC3 (orgapacheflex-1002) which should contain all the pom-fixes we recently discussed. Now the README is fixed and all assembly descriptors have Apache headers.

You can have a look at the staging repo at: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflex-1002/?

I'm carrying over the votes of RC1 and RC2:
alex +1 (binding)
piotr +1 (binding)
erik +1 (binding)

chris +1 (binding)

justin +0 (binding)
om +0 (binding)

So we're currently at
4 +1
2 +0
0 -1

I think now I have to reset the clock and give you another 72 hours, but we're not in a rush.

Chris

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flex Tool API 1.0.0 RC3

Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
+1
Package 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflex-1002/org/a
pache/flex/flex-tool-api/1.0.0/flex-tool-api-1.0.0-source-release.zip
Java 1.7
OS: Mac OS X x86_64 10.9.5
Source kit signatures match: y
Source kit builds: y
README is ok: y
RELEASE_NOTES is ok: y
NOTICE is ok: y
LICENSE is ok: y
No unapproved licenses or archives: y
No unapproved binaries: y




On 11/17/14, 1:59 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I just dropped the RC2 staging repo and created a new one RC3
>(orgapacheflex-1002) which should contain all the pom-fixes we recently
>discussed. Now the README is fixed and all assembly descriptors have
>Apache headers.
>
>You can have a look at the staging repo at:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflex-1002/?
>
>I'm carrying over the votes of RC1 and RC2:
>alex +1 (binding)
>piotr +1 (binding)
>erik +1 (binding)
>
>chris +1 (binding)
>
>justin +0 (binding)
>om +0 (binding)
>
>So we're currently at
>4 +1
>2 +0
>0 -1
>
>I think now I have to reset the clock and give you another 72 hours, but
>we're not in a rush.
>
>Chris