You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@trafficcontrol.apache.org by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> on 2016/12/20 18:01:28 UTC
[VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Hello All,
I've prepared another release for v1.8.0 (RC5)
Changes since 1.7.0:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
This corresponds to git:
Hash: b30cbc5d32c991e472c082b97f9bfd73a7699c66
Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Which can be verified with the following: git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
My code signing key is available here:
http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x4587A8F0&op=vindex
Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
Note that we are not providing the RPM files this time. The only
artifact provided is a source tar file which can be downloaded from
here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC4/
Let me know if you need the rpm files and I can make arrangements to
get them to you.
Per Apache guidelines, the .tar.gz file is signed with my pgp key (see
above) and md5 and sha1 checksums are also provided there.
This release candidate encompasses only license header changes, so we
are keeping the vote open until end of day Thursday, December 22,
2016.
Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
No worries, Eric.. we're going with submitting RC5 and noting this
issue and workaround in the release notes..
-dan
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the second email, but I just wanted to clarify that +1 did not include a judgment on the Riak bug.
>
> I wasn’t trying to say we should release with it, will leave that decision to others.
>
> —Eric
>
>> On Dec 22, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 on RC5 too
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>>
>>> Rgds,
>>> JvD
>>>
>>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
No worries, Eric.. we're going with submitting RC5 and noting this
issue and workaround in the release notes..
-dan
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the second email, but I just wanted to clarify that +1 did not include a judgment on the Riak bug.
>
> I wasn’t trying to say we should release with it, will leave that decision to others.
>
> —Eric
>
>> On Dec 22, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 on RC5 too
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>>
>>> Rgds,
>>> JvD
>>>
>>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
Sorry for the second email, but I just wanted to clarify that +1 did not include a judgment on the Riak bug.
I wasn’t trying to say we should release with it, will leave that decision to others.
—Eric
> On Dec 22, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on RC5 too
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> JvD
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
Sorry for the second email, but I just wanted to clarify that +1 did not include a judgment on the Riak bug.
I wasn’t trying to say we should release with it, will leave that decision to others.
—Eric
> On Dec 22, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on RC5 too
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> JvD
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
Also getting in my +1. -dan
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> +1 on RC5 too
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> JvD
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
Also getting in my +1. -dan
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> +1 on RC5 too
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> JvD
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
+1 on RC5 too
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>
> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>
> Rgds,
> JvD
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
+1 on RC5 too
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com> wrote:
>
> I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
>
> Rgds,
> JvD
>
>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com>.
I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
Rgds,
JvD
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Jan van Doorn <jv...@knutsel.com>.
I'm sticking with my +1 as well.
Rgds,
JvD
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 11:44, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by David Neuman <da...@gmail.com>.
I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the
license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the
license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available
> here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by David Neuman <da...@gmail.com>.
I spot checked a few files that were missing license headers in RC4 and the
license was there. Since the only thing that changes between RCs was the
license files, I am going to rely on my original testing and vote +1.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available
> here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
The VOTE to release RC5 of Traffic Control-incubating is now closed
(apologies for the late notice -- did not finish before Christmas
holiday..)
With a total of +4 and NO -1 votes, the VOTE passes. Overall vote
breakdown is as follows:
+1 Dave Neuman
+1 Jan van Doorn
+1 Eric Friedrich
+1 Dan Kirkwood
Thanks to everyone who voted. I'll open the second VOTE thread on
theIncubator general list shortly.
- Dan
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared another release for v1.8.0 (RC5)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: b30cbc5d32c991e472c082b97f9bfd73a7699c66
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> Which can be verified with the following: git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> My code signing key is available here:
> http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x4587A8F0&op=vindex
>
> Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
>
> Note that we are not providing the RPM files this time. The only
> artifact provided is a source tar file which can be downloaded from
> here:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC4/
>
> Let me know if you need the rpm files and I can make arrangements to
> get them to you.
>
> Per Apache guidelines, the .tar.gz file is signed with my pgp key (see
> above) and md5 and sha1 checksums are also provided there.
>
> This release candidate encompasses only license header changes, so we
> are keeping the vote open until end of day Thursday, December 22,
> 2016.
>
> Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
One correction: The signed source tarball and checksums are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC5/
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
The VOTE to release RC5 of Traffic Control-incubating is now closed
(apologies for the late notice -- did not finish before Christmas
holiday..)
With a total of +4 and NO -1 votes, the VOTE passes. Overall vote
breakdown is as follows:
+1 Dave Neuman
+1 Jan van Doorn
+1 Eric Friedrich
+1 Dan Kirkwood
Thanks to everyone who voted. I'll open the second VOTE thread on
theIncubator general list shortly.
- Dan
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared another release for v1.8.0 (RC5)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: b30cbc5d32c991e472c082b97f9bfd73a7699c66
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> Which can be verified with the following: git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC5
>
> My code signing key is available here:
> http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x4587A8F0&op=vindex
>
> Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
>
> Note that we are not providing the RPM files this time. The only
> artifact provided is a source tar file which can be downloaded from
> here:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC4/
>
> Let me know if you need the rpm files and I can make arrangements to
> get them to you.
>
> Per Apache guidelines, the .tar.gz file is signed with my pgp key (see
> above) and md5 and sha1 checksums are also provided there.
>
> This release candidate encompasses only license header changes, so we
> are keeping the vote open until end of day Thursday, December 22,
> 2016.
>
> Thanks!