[VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Yegor Kozlov <ye...@dinom.ru>]

Hi All,

A candidate for the POI-3.10-FINAL release is available at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/poi/

The release candidate was built from the REL_3_10-FINAL tag and
includes all changes and fixes committed in trunk up to Thursday, January
16:

 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/poi/tags/REL_3_10_FINAL/

As with all Apache release votes, please check that not only does the
code work, and no major breakages have occurred since the last
release, but also that packaging is correct, license headers and
notices exist etc.

The vote options are:

 +1  - I support this release
 0   - I don't object to this release, but I haven't checked it
 -1  - There's a problem with the release, and that is ....

I'm voting [+1]. Voting will last one week and end on Thursday, January 23.

P.S. Feel free to update
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/poi/3_10_FINAL/RELEASE-NOTES.txt.

Regards,
Yegor

Re: [VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Andreas Beeker <an...@gmx.de>]

Hi,

although there might be a few issues ...:

 > please check that not only does the code work
there are still some disabled junit tests, but they seem to be disabled for quite a while now

 > no major breakages have occurred since the last release
with r1553336 a few internal classes were re-/moved [1], at least the existing test-drivers still worked,
but one will need to use the ooxml-jars (anyways) when they want to use agile encryption
Furthermore two open bugs (#55955,#55025) exist which point out a - probably not major - breakage

 > but also that packaging is correct, license headers and notices exist etc.
- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1559297
... I've applied the license header after the releasing, only 2 base files didn't contain the license header ...

... I'm voting [+1] or as my colleagues would say:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/seliot/archive/2011/04/25/i-don-t-always-test-my-code-but-when-i-do-i-do-it-in-production.aspx
;)

Andi

[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1553336

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Dominik Stadler <do...@gmx.at>]

I just committed the following on trunk: r1559810: "adjust ant-target
check-rat: Download jarfile instead of requiring it locally, write
report to a temporary file and scan it for failures to break the build
if necessary"

This also enabled us to add the rat-check to the Jenkins builds via r1559813.

BTW, on trunk it already runs fine again as Andreas fixed the
header-problems there already.

Thanks... Dominik.

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Nick Burch <ap...@gagravarr.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
>>
>> Should we include rat-check in the dist target? it should be pedantic IMO.
>> There is no point to generate a release with missing licence headers.
>
>
> Before a release, I'd say that everything either needs a license header, or
> have been listed in the exclusions in the build fle
>
> However, I'm not sure if it's possible to have the rat-check ant task fail
> the build? Any one know?
>
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Nick Burch <ap...@gagravarr.org>]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
> Should we include rat-check in the dist target? it should be pedantic 
> IMO. There is no point to generate a release with missing licence 
> headers.

Before a release, I'd say that everything either needs a license header, 
or have been listed in the exclusions in the build fle

However, I'm not sure if it's possible to have the rat-check ant task fail 
the build? Any one know?

Nick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Yegor Kozlov <ye...@dinom.ru>]

Should we include rat-check in the dist target? it should be pedantic IMO.
There is no point to generate a release with missing licence headers.



On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Nick Burch <ap...@gagravarr.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
>
>> A candidate for the POI-3.10-FINAL release is available at:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/poi/
>>
>
> Sorry, but I'm going to have to -1 this release
>
> Several of the files in the src package seem to be missing license
> headers, as shown from "ant rat-check"
>
> FWIW, the release-guide docs do have that check as step 7 in the release
> Prerequisites :/
>
> Nick
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release POI 3.10-FINAL

[Nick Burch <ap...@gagravarr.org>]

On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Yegor Kozlov wrote:
> A candidate for the POI-3.10-FINAL release is available at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/poi/

Sorry, but I'm going to have to -1 this release

Several of the files in the src package seem to be missing license 
headers, as shown from "ant rat-check"

FWIW, the release-guide docs do have that check as step 7 in the release 
Prerequisites :/

Nick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org