You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Timothée Maret <ti...@gmail.com> on 2017/01/26 10:37:38 UTC
[VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Hi,
We solved 1 issues in this release:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING/fixforversion/12332065
There are no outstanding issues.
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachesling-1626/
You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
signatures:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/sling/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
Usage:
sh check_staged_release.sh 1626 /tmp/sling-staging
Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] 0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
This majority vote is open for at least 72 hours.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
On Monday 30 January 2017 09:47:45 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> while I agree that it feels a little bit strange release without any
> functional changes, there is nothing wrong with doing this release. As
> you say releasing is cheap.
that depends on how you define cheap. Doing a release takes about 1 hour and
checking a release at least 20 to 30 minutes per developer (additional time
for integrating a new release into a product).
Regards,
O.
> Carsten
>
> Timothee Maret wrote
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
> >> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
> >>
> >> functional
> >>
> >>> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
> >>
> >> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
> >
> > The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @ Adobe
> > as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
> >
> > Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for it.
> > However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
> > release process.
> > Please let me know.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Timothee
> >
> >> O.
> >>
> >>> stefan
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Timothee Maret <tm...@apache.org>.
Thanks Carsten! I guess it does not hurt to be formal ;-)
Tim
2017-01-30 13:59 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>:
> Oh...
>
> +1 :)
>
> Carsten
>
> Timothee Maret wrote
> > Thanks Carsten for your input!
> >
> > Should I count it as a +1 (so far there has been 2 x +1) ?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Timothee
> >
> > 2017-01-30 9:47 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> while I agree that it feels a little bit strange release without any
> >> functional changes, there is nothing wrong with doing this release. As
> >> you say releasing is cheap.
> >>
> >> Carsten
> >>
> >> Timothee Maret wrote
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> 2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
> >>>
> >>>> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
> >>>> functional
> >>>>> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
> >>>>
> >>>> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @
> Adobe
> >>> as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
> >>>
> >>> Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for
> >> it.
> >>> However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
> >>> release process.
> >>> Please let me know.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Timothee
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> O.
> >>>>
> >>>>> stefan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Carsten Ziegeler
> >> Adobe Research Switzerland
> >> cziegeler@apache.org
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland
> cziegeler@apache.org
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Oh...
+1 :)
Carsten
Timothee Maret wrote
> Thanks Carsten for your input!
>
> Should I count it as a +1 (so far there has been 2 x +1) ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Timothee
>
> 2017-01-30 9:47 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> while I agree that it feels a little bit strange release without any
>> functional changes, there is nothing wrong with doing this release. As
>> you say releasing is cheap.
>>
>> Carsten
>>
>> Timothee Maret wrote
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> 2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
>>>> functional
>>>>> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
>>>>
>>>> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @ Adobe
>>> as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
>>>
>>> Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for
>> it.
>>> However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
>>> release process.
>>> Please let me know.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Timothee
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> O.
>>>>
>>>>> stefan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Carsten Ziegeler
>> Adobe Research Switzerland
>> cziegeler@apache.org
>>
>
--
Carsten Ziegeler
Adobe Research Switzerland
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Timothee Maret <tm...@apache.org>.
Thanks Carsten for your input!
Should I count it as a +1 (so far there has been 2 x +1) ?
Regards,
Timothee
2017-01-30 9:47 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>:
> Hi,
>
> while I agree that it feels a little bit strange release without any
> functional changes, there is nothing wrong with doing this release. As
> you say releasing is cheap.
>
> Carsten
>
> Timothee Maret wrote
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
> >
> >> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
> >> functional
> >>> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
> >>
> >> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
> >>
> >
> > The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @ Adobe
> > as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
> >
> > Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for
> it.
> > However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
> > release process.
> > Please let me know.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Timothee
> >
> >
> >>
> >> O.
> >>
> >>> stefan
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland
> cziegeler@apache.org
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Hi,
while I agree that it feels a little bit strange release without any
functional changes, there is nothing wrong with doing this release. As
you say releasing is cheap.
Carsten
Timothee Maret wrote
> Hi,
>
> 2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
>
>> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
>> functional
>>> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
>>
>> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
>>
>
> The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @ Adobe
> as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
>
> Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for it.
> However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
> release process.
> Please let me know.
>
> Regards,
>
> Timothee
>
>
>>
>> O.
>>
>>> stefan
>>
>>
>
--
Carsten Ziegeler
Adobe Research Switzerland
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Timothee Maret <tm...@apache.org>.
Hi,
2017-01-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>:
> On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no
> functional
> > change and only an improved unit test coverage)
>
> Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
>
The motive is a technical one. Indeed, a release is needed for us @ Adobe
as we run internal tests on released artefacts.
Generally, I thought that releasing are cheap and thus we could go for it.
However, if it does not make sense from Sling POV, I would cancel the
release process.
Please let me know.
Regards,
Timothee
>
> O.
>
> > stefan
>
>
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
On Thursday 26 January 2017 12:58:34 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> +1
>
> (although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no functional
> change and only an improved unit test coverage)
Does improved test coverage really justify a new release?
O.
> stefan
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>.
+1
(although it looks strange that the list of changes contains no functional change and only an improved unit test coverage)
stefan
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Sling ABC version Resource Inventory 1.0.6
Posted by Stefan Egli <st...@apache.org>.
+1
Cheers,
Stefan
On 26/01/17 11:37, "Timothée Maret" <maret.timothee@gmail.com on behalf of
timothee.maret@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>We solved 1 issues in this release:
>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING/fixforversion/12332065
>
>There are no outstanding issues.
>
>Staging repository:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachesling-1626/
>
>You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
>signatures:
>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/sling/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
>Usage:
>sh check_staged_release.sh 1626 /tmp/sling-staging
>
>Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>
>This majority vote is open for at least 72 hours.