You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to xap-dev@incubator.apache.org by Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> on 2007/02/02 20:52:46 UTC
XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
fix all the issues that were found.
One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
Dojo repository.
I have posted a release candidate at:
http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
+1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
release. For more information on the voting process, please review
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
the packages because...
Here is my +1
Bob (Buffone)
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/7/07, Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
<snip>
> From now on let's be diligent about making sure the licensing is correct
> on all files and packages going into the repository. Waiting to the
> last minute just makes it harder.
>
> I guess this is why things are put into incubation first; this way we
> can all learn the lessons.
preparing for the first release proves difficult for most podlings
open source releases have quite a different rhythm from closed source
ones: the tendency is to trade time for quality. good or bad, releases
with my name on keep turning up years down the line. i've come to the
conclusion that the extra effort required to produce a release which i
can feel proud of is worthwhile.
- robert
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com>.
All of the recommended changes have been committed to the repository.
1.) Headers in the files are now compliant with
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
Trevor: Thanks for creating the PHP code to update all the files.
2.) The license and notice file has been updated based on the feedback.
Michael: Can you run the RAT tool on the project to double check the
files are complaint. If everything looks good I will post another build
an open up the voting again.
Is there anything else needed?
Thanks for the work on fixing these things.
From now on let's be diligent about making sure the licensing is correct
on all files and packages going into the repository. Waiting to the
last minute just makes it harder.
I guess this is why things are put into incubation first; this way we
can all learn the lessons.
Bob (Buffone)
-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff Schmidt [mailto:cliffschmidt@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 10:11 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
I was about to reply with my concerns, but since Robert just offered a
good set of comments, I'll integrate mine into his.
See below.
Cliff
On 2/5/07, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/2/07, Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I have posted a release candidate at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
>
> (this is the sort of review i do for proposals made to the incubator
list)
>
> major issues
> ---------------
>
> the NOTICE.txt is missing. this needs to be the standard apache NOTICE
> (since the incubator disclaimer is in the README)
yes - the NOTICE file should include what is described here:
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
> minor issues
> ---------------
>
> the libraries (in /source/buildsystem/buildscripts/lib) should have
> their licenses detailed. this could be done by including all the
> licenses in the top level LICENSE or by creating a .LICENSE file for
> each library.
In the latter option, there still needs to be some pointer to all
applicable licenses in the top-level LICENSE file. Right now, there's
nothing in the LICENSE file except the Apache License, which might
imply that those are the only terms of the software. For me, this is
a major issue that must be fixed prior to release.
In other words, a single, top-level LICENSE file must give all the
information a user needs to know what the terms are of the Apache
product -- whether that info is copied into the file or pointed to by
reference. See the last two sentences in the this section:
http://apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new:
"Otherwise, you should append their license(s) to the LICENSE file at
the top of the distribution, or at least put a pointer in the LICENSE
file to the third-party license. In all cases, be sure to obey the
licensing constraints of the original author. If that is not possible,
then do not redistribute their work."
Note that the rest of this doc has been outdated, but this particular
part is still required. I need to get this particular page cleaned up
soon.
> the older style header is used in some files. may need to run the
> conversion script on the source (IIRC it's in committers).
yep -- that would be good (and is required). Most committers are
probably aware of this, but for those who are not, you can read more
at http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html.
> comments and notes
> -------------------------
>
> the custom rhino jar seems ok(ish) from a legal pespective but apache
> dislike maintaining code with other licenses. i'm not sure about the
> policy in this situation.
If this comes from MPL code, it's important to make sure all those
requirements are met. This includes making sure that the entire
source is included with the binary or pointed to in a note. It's also
important to make sure whatever customizations were distinguished from
the original code for copyright purposes and as is required by the
license, and if/how they are differently licensed.
> the incubation disclaimer is in the README.txt not as convention as in
> a NOTICE or DISCLAIMER but fine. the README reads well so that is a
> good home.
Actually, I disagree with Robert on this, but I don't think it makes a
difference to this release. The first location ever used for an
incubation disclaimer was the README file, and that is what I still
often see (although I'm not seeing where that is doc'd right now).
I've also seen a DISCLAIMER file, which is fine. However, I do NOT
think it should be in the NOTICE file. The NOTICE file has one
specific purpose, which is to place copyright and attribution notices
as required by third-party notices and for the ASF notice. See
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice. I think it's a bad
idea to also throw in the incubation notice.
> the contents of the README are the release notes. this is less
> conventional than in a RELEASE_NOTES but that's fine. words good but a
> description of xap is missing. release notes for an open source
> project are a form of guerilla advertising. users will often skip the
> formal documentation but read short descriptions included in the
> release notes and on the download page. also good for indexing.
This wasn't in my list of notes, but I generally agree with Robert's
note on this.
> full releases need to be signed (as well as summed). not a problem if
> your OpenPGP foo is strong but if you want me to check the signature
> and that your key's propagated to well known servers, you need to
> create a signature.
+1
and actually, I also generally agree with all of Robert's suggestions
below.
Cliff
> suggestions (stuff to think about, my personal opinions)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> linking to online document is ok from release documentation if you do
> this, it's best to ensure that versions of the document are preserved
> for each release and that this is linked to. this stops user
> frustration when they follow links to features which are not in the
> release the have.
>
> once xap is a full project, apache should always be included in the
> name of the release (for example apache-xap-ajax-framework-3.4.5).
> this gives us more traction when it comes to trademarks. the idea is
> that if someone else rolls an unofficial artifact, we can ask them
> kindly but firm to stop.
>
> the compressed archive unpacks directly into the root of a directory.
> a lot of users (including myself ;-) find this very annoying. it means
> that i have to look at the contents and then create a new directory.
>
> there are generally broad popular schools of thought. the first is
> that every type of distribution shipped should unpack into a different
> directory with a meaningful name. the second is that the should all
> unpack the same directory, each acting as an overlay and combining
> together harmoniously.
>
> first impressions matter. that's especially true with open source
> releases. when users download artifacts they usually haven't made a
> definitive choice to use it. i can usually gauge the level of
> expertise and maturity of a project just by looking at a release but
> normal users also pick up a surprising amount. by creating a directory
> not only do you get the chance to advertise the name of the project as
> you want but it also shows to the user that you have taken time and
> care over the software.
>
> an open source release should distribute source for a release. just a
> plain export of the repository. it's the right thing to do but there
> are number of pragmatic reasons. here a couple:
>
> a successful open source project (on the apache model) needs to
> attract developers as well as users. ship binaries (by which i mean
> anything which isn't just a simple export) to make things easy for
> users but also ship a source distribution for developers.
>
> many downstream repackages work from the source distribution. unless
> you ship a source distribution they will not pick up the project.
>
> - robert
>
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
I was about to reply with my concerns, but since Robert just offered a
good set of comments, I'll integrate mine into his.
See below.
Cliff
On 2/5/07, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/2/07, Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I have posted a release candidate at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
>
> (this is the sort of review i do for proposals made to the incubator list)
>
> major issues
> ---------------
>
> the NOTICE.txt is missing. this needs to be the standard apache NOTICE
> (since the incubator disclaimer is in the README)
yes - the NOTICE file should include what is described here:
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
> minor issues
> ---------------
>
> the libraries (in /source/buildsystem/buildscripts/lib) should have
> their licenses detailed. this could be done by including all the
> licenses in the top level LICENSE or by creating a .LICENSE file for
> each library.
In the latter option, there still needs to be some pointer to all
applicable licenses in the top-level LICENSE file. Right now, there's
nothing in the LICENSE file except the Apache License, which might
imply that those are the only terms of the software. For me, this is
a major issue that must be fixed prior to release.
In other words, a single, top-level LICENSE file must give all the
information a user needs to know what the terms are of the Apache
product -- whether that info is copied into the file or pointed to by
reference. See the last two sentences in the this section:
http://apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new:
"Otherwise, you should append their license(s) to the LICENSE file at
the top of the distribution, or at least put a pointer in the LICENSE
file to the third-party license. In all cases, be sure to obey the
licensing constraints of the original author. If that is not possible,
then do not redistribute their work."
Note that the rest of this doc has been outdated, but this particular
part is still required. I need to get this particular page cleaned up
soon.
> the older style header is used in some files. may need to run the
> conversion script on the source (IIRC it's in committers).
yep -- that would be good (and is required). Most committers are
probably aware of this, but for those who are not, you can read more
at http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html.
> comments and notes
> -------------------------
>
> the custom rhino jar seems ok(ish) from a legal pespective but apache
> dislike maintaining code with other licenses. i'm not sure about the
> policy in this situation.
If this comes from MPL code, it's important to make sure all those
requirements are met. This includes making sure that the entire
source is included with the binary or pointed to in a note. It's also
important to make sure whatever customizations were distinguished from
the original code for copyright purposes and as is required by the
license, and if/how they are differently licensed.
> the incubation disclaimer is in the README.txt not as convention as in
> a NOTICE or DISCLAIMER but fine. the README reads well so that is a
> good home.
Actually, I disagree with Robert on this, but I don't think it makes a
difference to this release. The first location ever used for an
incubation disclaimer was the README file, and that is what I still
often see (although I'm not seeing where that is doc'd right now).
I've also seen a DISCLAIMER file, which is fine. However, I do NOT
think it should be in the NOTICE file. The NOTICE file has one
specific purpose, which is to place copyright and attribution notices
as required by third-party notices and for the ASF notice. See
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice. I think it's a bad
idea to also throw in the incubation notice.
> the contents of the README are the release notes. this is less
> conventional than in a RELEASE_NOTES but that's fine. words good but a
> description of xap is missing. release notes for an open source
> project are a form of guerilla advertising. users will often skip the
> formal documentation but read short descriptions included in the
> release notes and on the download page. also good for indexing.
This wasn't in my list of notes, but I generally agree with Robert's
note on this.
> full releases need to be signed (as well as summed). not a problem if
> your OpenPGP foo is strong but if you want me to check the signature
> and that your key's propagated to well known servers, you need to
> create a signature.
+1
and actually, I also generally agree with all of Robert's suggestions below.
Cliff
> suggestions (stuff to think about, my personal opinions)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> linking to online document is ok from release documentation if you do
> this, it's best to ensure that versions of the document are preserved
> for each release and that this is linked to. this stops user
> frustration when they follow links to features which are not in the
> release the have.
>
> once xap is a full project, apache should always be included in the
> name of the release (for example apache-xap-ajax-framework-3.4.5).
> this gives us more traction when it comes to trademarks. the idea is
> that if someone else rolls an unofficial artifact, we can ask them
> kindly but firm to stop.
>
> the compressed archive unpacks directly into the root of a directory.
> a lot of users (including myself ;-) find this very annoying. it means
> that i have to look at the contents and then create a new directory.
>
> there are generally broad popular schools of thought. the first is
> that every type of distribution shipped should unpack into a different
> directory with a meaningful name. the second is that the should all
> unpack the same directory, each acting as an overlay and combining
> together harmoniously.
>
> first impressions matter. that's especially true with open source
> releases. when users download artifacts they usually haven't made a
> definitive choice to use it. i can usually gauge the level of
> expertise and maturity of a project just by looking at a release but
> normal users also pick up a surprising amount. by creating a directory
> not only do you get the chance to advertise the name of the project as
> you want but it also shows to the user that you have taken time and
> care over the software.
>
> an open source release should distribute source for a release. just a
> plain export of the repository. it's the right thing to do but there
> are number of pragmatic reasons. here a couple:
>
> a successful open source project (on the apache model) needs to
> attract developers as well as users. ship binaries (by which i mean
> anything which isn't just a simple export) to make things easy for
> users but also ship a source distribution for developers.
>
> many downstream repackages work from the source distribution. unless
> you ship a source distribution they will not pick up the project.
>
> - robert
>
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/2/07, Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I have posted a release candidate at:
> http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
(this is the sort of review i do for proposals made to the incubator list)
major issues
---------------
the NOTICE.txt is missing. this needs to be the standard apache NOTICE
(since the incubator disclaimer is in the README)
minor issues
---------------
the libraries (in /source/buildsystem/buildscripts/lib) should have
their licenses detailed. this could be done by including all the
licenses in the top level LICENSE or by creating a .LICENSE file for
each library.
the older style header is used in some files. may need to run the
conversion script on the source (IIRC it's in committers).
comments and notes
-------------------------
the custom rhino jar seems ok(ish) from a legal pespective but apache
dislike maintaining code with other licenses. i'm not sure about the
policy in this situation.
the incubation disclaimer is in the README.txt not as convention as in
a NOTICE or DISCLAIMER but fine. the README reads well so that is a
good home.
the contents of the README are the release notes. this is less
conventional than in a RELEASE_NOTES but that's fine. words good but a
description of xap is missing. release notes for an open source
project are a form of guerilla advertising. users will often skip the
formal documentation but read short descriptions included in the
release notes and on the download page. also good for indexing.
full releases need to be signed (as well as summed). not a problem if
your OpenPGP foo is strong but if you want me to check the signature
and that your key's propagated to well known servers, you need to
create a signature.
suggestions (stuff to think about, my personal opinions)
------------------------------------------------------------------
linking to online document is ok from release documentation if you do
this, it's best to ensure that versions of the document are preserved
for each release and that this is linked to. this stops user
frustration when they follow links to features which are not in the
release the have.
once xap is a full project, apache should always be included in the
name of the release (for example apache-xap-ajax-framework-3.4.5).
this gives us more traction when it comes to trademarks. the idea is
that if someone else rolls an unofficial artifact, we can ask them
kindly but firm to stop.
the compressed archive unpacks directly into the root of a directory.
a lot of users (including myself ;-) find this very annoying. it means
that i have to look at the contents and then create a new directory.
there are generally broad popular schools of thought. the first is
that every type of distribution shipped should unpack into a different
directory with a meaningful name. the second is that the should all
unpack the same directory, each acting as an overlay and combining
together harmoniously.
first impressions matter. that's especially true with open source
releases. when users download artifacts they usually haven't made a
definitive choice to use it. i can usually gauge the level of
expertise and maturity of a project just by looking at a release but
normal users also pick up a surprising amount. by creating a directory
not only do you get the chance to advertise the name of the project as
you want but it also shows to the user that you have taken time and
care over the software.
an open source release should distribute source for a release. just a
plain export of the repository. it's the right thing to do but there
are number of pragmatic reasons. here a couple:
a successful open source project (on the apache model) needs to
attract developers as well as users. ship binaries (by which i mean
anything which isn't just a simple export) to make things easy for
users but also ship a source distribution for developers.
many downstream repackages work from the source distribution. unless
you ship a source distribution they will not pick up the project.
- robert
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/2/07, Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
> fix all the issues that were found.
+1
sorry for not really prioritising a complete analysis: i will do for
the next few days
> One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
> issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
> licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
> files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
> Dojo repository.
that's fine: it's wrong to add new headers
maybe someone might volunteer to let DoJo know (always good to feed
back to upstream)
in the current source,
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/xap/trunk/NOTICE.txt still
needs updating. unless you prefer a separate DISCLAIMER.txt, the
standard incubator disclaimer needs to be included (as well as the
usual apache stuff).
from what i can tell,
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/xap/trunk/buildsystem/JSDoc-1.9.9.2
is licensed under the GPL. from what i can tell, this is only used as
part of the build process. hopefully, people will jump in and correct
any misunderstandings i've made.
this means that we only have policy worries, not legal ones :-)
storing GPL'd code in an apache repository is against policy. users
expect that they can modify any apache source and include it within
their applications without worrying about viral licensing conditions.
i'd recommend removing the source and ask that XAP builders install a
version locally.
- robert
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com>.
On 2/5/07, Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> I'd recommend continuing on this vote with NOTICE.TXT removed.
here are some personal observations (mentor hat removed)
i usually start new VOTE threads in a situation like this since i find
it easier for myself and others to tally but there's nothing
particular wrong with the suggested approach: whatever works is good.
traditionally, vote threads are subjects prefixed with [VOTE]. ATM the
xap development mailing list is low volume so it's not a problem but
once project momentum starts to build up, only a limited number of
developers will read every email exchange promptly.
--------------------------
We will incorporate the [VOTE] prefix into these types of emails from
now on.
Also there was only one conditional +1 (Coach), on removing JRoller from
the NOTICE.TXT file and adding XAP information. This has been done and
uploaded so we should be good to go.
--------------------------
> +1 Release the packages (with NOTICE.TXT removed) as Apache XAP 0.3.0
(mentor hat replaced)
getting the NOTICE.txt content right is important. (given the project
style) it needs to contain the apache notices and the incubator
disclaimer. if any licenses composing the release require attribution
then these should be included in the NOTICE.
(the NOTICE replaces the advertising clause found in AL1.0 and AL1.1.
AL2 requires that downstream repackages and modifies retain this file.
some compatible licenses require attribution and this is the right
place for these.)
----------------------------------
The NOTICE.TXT file has been updated with the correct information.
----------------------------------
- robert
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/5/07, Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> I'd recommend continuing on this vote with NOTICE.TXT removed.
here are some personal observations (mentor hat removed)
i usually start new VOTE threads in a situation like this since i find
it easier for myself and others to tally but there's nothing
particular wrong with the suggested approach: whatever works is good.
traditionally, vote threads are subjects prefixed with [VOTE]. ATM the
xap development mailing list is low volume so it's not a problem but
once project momentum starts to build up, only a limited number of
developers will read every email exchange promptly.
> +1 Release the packages (with NOTICE.TXT removed) as Apache XAP 0.3.0
(mentor hat replaced)
getting the NOTICE.txt content right is important. (given the project
style) it needs to contain the apache notices and the incubator
disclaimer. if any licenses composing the release require attribution
then these should be included in the NOTICE.
(the NOTICE replaces the advertising clause found in AL1.0 and AL1.1.
AL2 requires that downstream repackages and modifies retain this file.
some compatible licenses require attribution and this is the right
place for these.)
- robert
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com>.
Great. +1.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 6:14 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Coach,
>
> The NOTICE.TXT has been changed to include XAP related information.
It
> is now correct in the repository as well as the release build.
>
> Bob (Buffone)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 2:20 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> I'd recommend continuing on this vote with NOTICE.TXT removed.
>
> +1 Release the packages (with NOTICE.TXT removed) as Apache XAP 0.3.0
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:30 PM
> > To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
> >
> > 1.) ------------------
> > The samples directory at the top level has been already built (Added
> All
> > XAP Functionality) and ready to be deployed.
> >
> > The source directory contains the contents of SVN and allows
> developers
> > to start developing XAP with out checking out the repository. Being
> our
> > first release, having a single download with source included will
make
> > it easy to build XAP for developers that want to as well as make the
> > release process simpler. For future releases we can separate the
two,
> > but most of the source is needed anyways for running projects.
> >
> > 2.) ------------------
> > The NOTICE.TXT file that is in there was an inadvertent error.
> >
> > Do we need to start over and open this up for a revote or just
remove
> > the file?
> >
> > Bob (Buffone)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 12:53 PM
> > To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
> >
> > Just tried this release candidate. Here are the questions:
> >
> > 1. There is a "samples" directory under "source" directory. There is
> > also a "samples" directory who is a sibling of "source" directory.
The
> > content of these two "samples" directories are very similar. Is
there
> a
> > particular reason for this?
> >
> > 2. There is still a "NOTICE.TXT" file under "source" directory that
> > attributes credit and copyright to ROLLER project. Any thought?
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> > > To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
> > >
> > > Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together
> and
> > > fix all the issues that were found.
> > >
> > > One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any
> > license
> > > issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking
at
> > the
> > > licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some
> > template
> > > files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't
in
> > the
> > > Dojo repository.
> > >
> > > I have posted a release candidate at:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
> > >
> > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
> > >
> > > The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least
three
> > > +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow
> this
> > > release. For more information on the voting process, please
review
> > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not
> release
> > > the packages because...
> > >
> > > Here is my +1
> > >
> > > Bob (Buffone)
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com>.
Coach,
The NOTICE.TXT has been changed to include XAP related information. It
is now correct in the repository as well as the release build.
Bob (Buffone)
-----Original Message-----
From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 2:20 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
I'd recommend continuing on this vote with NOTICE.TXT removed.
+1 Release the packages (with NOTICE.TXT removed) as Apache XAP 0.3.0
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> 1.) ------------------
> The samples directory at the top level has been already built (Added
All
> XAP Functionality) and ready to be deployed.
>
> The source directory contains the contents of SVN and allows
developers
> to start developing XAP with out checking out the repository. Being
our
> first release, having a single download with source included will make
> it easy to build XAP for developers that want to as well as make the
> release process simpler. For future releases we can separate the two,
> but most of the source is needed anyways for running projects.
>
> 2.) ------------------
> The NOTICE.TXT file that is in there was an inadvertent error.
>
> Do we need to start over and open this up for a revote or just remove
> the file?
>
> Bob (Buffone)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 12:53 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Just tried this release candidate. Here are the questions:
>
> 1. There is a "samples" directory under "source" directory. There is
> also a "samples" directory who is a sibling of "source" directory. The
> content of these two "samples" directories are very similar. Is there
a
> particular reason for this?
>
> 2. There is still a "NOTICE.TXT" file under "source" directory that
> attributes credit and copyright to ROLLER project. Any thought?
>
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> > To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
> >
> > Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together
and
> > fix all the issues that were found.
> >
> > One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any
> license
> > issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at
> the
> > licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some
> template
> > files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in
> the
> > Dojo repository.
> >
> > I have posted a release candidate at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
> >
> > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
> >
> > The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
> > +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow
this
> > release. For more information on the voting process, please review
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not
release
> > the packages because...
> >
> > Here is my +1
> >
> > Bob (Buffone)
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com>.
I'd recommend continuing on this vote with NOTICE.TXT removed.
+1 Release the packages (with NOTICE.TXT removed) as Apache XAP 0.3.0
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> 1.) ------------------
> The samples directory at the top level has been already built (Added
All
> XAP Functionality) and ready to be deployed.
>
> The source directory contains the contents of SVN and allows
developers
> to start developing XAP with out checking out the repository. Being
our
> first release, having a single download with source included will make
> it easy to build XAP for developers that want to as well as make the
> release process simpler. For future releases we can separate the two,
> but most of the source is needed anyways for running projects.
>
> 2.) ------------------
> The NOTICE.TXT file that is in there was an inadvertent error.
>
> Do we need to start over and open this up for a revote or just remove
> the file?
>
> Bob (Buffone)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 12:53 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Just tried this release candidate. Here are the questions:
>
> 1. There is a "samples" directory under "source" directory. There is
> also a "samples" directory who is a sibling of "source" directory. The
> content of these two "samples" directories are very similar. Is there
a
> particular reason for this?
>
> 2. There is still a "NOTICE.TXT" file under "source" directory that
> attributes credit and copyright to ROLLER project. Any thought?
>
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> > To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
> >
> > Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together
and
> > fix all the issues that were found.
> >
> > One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any
> license
> > issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at
> the
> > licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some
> template
> > files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in
> the
> > Dojo repository.
> >
> > I have posted a release candidate at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
> >
> > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
> >
> > The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
> > +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow
this
> > release. For more information on the voting process, please review
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not
release
> > the packages because...
> >
> > Here is my +1
> >
> > Bob (Buffone)
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Bob Buffone <rb...@nexaweb.com>.
1.) ------------------
The samples directory at the top level has been already built (Added All
XAP Functionality) and ready to be deployed.
The source directory contains the contents of SVN and allows developers
to start developing XAP with out checking out the repository. Being our
first release, having a single download with source included will make
it easy to build XAP for developers that want to as well as make the
release process simpler. For future releases we can separate the two,
but most of the source is needed anyways for running projects.
2.) ------------------
The NOTICE.TXT file that is in there was an inadvertent error.
Do we need to start over and open this up for a revote or just remove
the file?
Bob (Buffone)
-----Original Message-----
From: Coach Wei [mailto:coach@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 12:53 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Just tried this release candidate. Here are the questions:
1. There is a "samples" directory under "source" directory. There is
also a "samples" directory who is a sibling of "source" directory. The
content of these two "samples" directories are very similar. Is there a
particular reason for this?
2. There is still a "NOTICE.TXT" file under "source" directory that
attributes credit and copyright to ROLLER project. Any thought?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
> fix all the issues that were found.
>
> One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any
license
> issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at
the
> licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some
template
> files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in
the
> Dojo repository.
>
> I have posted a release candidate at:
> http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
> +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
> release. For more information on the voting process, please review
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
> the packages because...
>
> Here is my +1
>
> Bob (Buffone)
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com>.
Just tried this release candidate. Here are the questions:
1. There is a "samples" directory under "source" directory. There is
also a "samples" directory who is a sibling of "source" directory. The
content of these two "samples" directories are very similar. Is there a
particular reason for this?
2. There is still a "NOTICE.TXT" file under "source" directory that
attributes credit and copyright to ROLLER project. Any thought?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
> fix all the issues that were found.
>
> One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any
license
> issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at
the
> licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some
template
> files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in
the
> Dojo repository.
>
> I have posted a release candidate at:
> http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
> +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
> release. For more information on the voting process, please review
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
> the packages because...
>
> Here is my +1
>
> Bob (Buffone)
Re: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Scott Boyd <sc...@gmail.com>.
+1
Great work everyone. All the samples/demos seem to be working fine in
IE 6, IE 7, and FF 2.0. The logging enhancements James checked in
have a noticeable impact on performance for the widget tests.
Perhaps we can write some Ant tasks which will retrieve the required
version of JSDoc and any other dependencies from their respective
repositories, to assist developers in the task of configuring their
local environment.
I deleted the tag 0.3.0, and created a new tag XAP_0.3.0 to reflect
this release candidate. I think [product_version] is a better tag
name than simply [version].
-Scott Boyd
On 2/5/07, Trevor Oldak <TO...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> +1
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
>
> Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
> fix all the issues that were found.
>
> One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
> issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
> licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
> files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
> Dojo repository.
>
> I have posted a release candidate at:
> http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
> +1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
> release. For more information on the voting process, please review
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
> the packages because...
>
> Here is my +1
>
> Bob (Buffone)
>
>
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Rob Gagne <RG...@nexaweb.com>.
+1 for me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
fix all the issues that were found.
One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
Dojo repository.
I have posted a release candidate at:
http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
+1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
release. For more information on the voting process, please review
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
the packages because...
Here is my +1
Bob (Buffone)
Logging, ContainerLifeCycleObject, misc
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
1. I checked in the new logging stuff, without checking in any code that
uses it. That code will be checked in after this release as I don't want
to destabilize stuff right now.
The logger I checked in should be very similar to log4j.
2. I want to remove ContainerLifeCycleObject. It isn't very useful and
using base classes for custom logic is not intuitive in javascript. Here
is what I want to do instead:
When any custom class is put into a container, call "addedToContainer"
on it. (We do this already)
When any custom class is removed from a container, call
"removedFromContainer" on it. (We do this already)
When any custom class is put into a container, if it does not already
have a "getSession" method on it inject one that does the right thing.
(This would be a new behavior)
The third part is the key. The only thing the ContainerLifeCycleObject
really does is automatically provide a getSession(), but we can do that
through injection. (Reminder: right now in an event handler the only way
to get the session is to get it off the event object, or else have
extended ContainerLifeCycleObject.)
We only use ContainerLifeCycleObject in a handful of places and it would
be very easy to remove. I'm all for less code, especially if the code
being removed doesn't really do much anyway.
James Margaris
Vertical and horizontalBoxPane redux
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
After much struggle I think these both should be working well.
The "boxFlex" attribute is now supported, allowing multiple components
within the layout to stretch in proportion to their box flexes.
It seems to work on IE6, IE7 and FF.
James Margaris
Changes to BorderPane
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
Right now BorderPane uses a passive layout rather than an active one.
Passive layout: A layout based on tables or CSS that the browser can
handle without code.
Active layout: A layout that is performed by code that must be called
when the container changes size.
Passive layouts are a better strategy in general because they don't
suffer from weird visual quirks during resizing, don't require code, and
integrate better with plain HTML and other HTML widgets. For an active
layout you have to detect when the size of something changes and cascade
that down to children, which is tricky.
However, certain things are simply not achievable with a passive layout.
The BorderPane we have today works well in Mozilla but in IE it does not
work, it sizes too large vertically. (It does work in quirks mode in IE,
but quirks mode has plenty of other problems)
Our strategy was to divide a border pane into three rows, with the
middle row set to height 100% and the middle cell of the middle row set
to width 100%. In IE this will unfortunately ALWAYS make the center row
100% of the table size as set, which then forces the table to grow
vertically. So if you try to make a 300x300 table it might size to
300x360 instead. (If the the top and bottom rows are both 30px tall)
Converting BorderPane to an active layout fixes these problems. I'm
going to check in a new BorderPane that uses active layout, I've tested
all the samples and they seem to work ok.
I would expect some difference in behavior if you don't set the size of
the BorderPane initially or put it in something like a splitPane that
fixes the size. Under the old scheme the size of the borderPane would
end up calculated as relatively correct because the components were
stuck in a table with the appropriate structure. Now all the children
are just random stacked divs until the borderPane performs layout.
This is annoying, but I would rather have a borderPane that works the
same on all browsers than one with some better edge-case behavior that
doesn't work for simple cases in IE.
James Margaris
Some class name changes
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
Just a head's up, I am changing JsFormatterImpl to AbstractFormatter to be in line with our existing naming, so anyone extending that class needs to make that change. Of course I am changing all the checked-in code to reflect this.
I am also removing DataSetFactory but I doubt any external code would use this.
James Margaris
Re: XAP 0.3.0 tag
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/10/07, James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> So I created a 'XAP_0.3.0_RC2'
>
> If nobody objects I will delete the old one, as it serves no purpose.
> And start checking things into trunk again. I'll wait till at least
> Sunday afternoon/evening EST to do either.
subversion tags are cheap so there are no good reasons to delete them
but many good reasons to keep them. here are a couple:
the tag serves as a record of the process which create the release.
public development allows anyone who's interested to follow the
process now or at some time in the future. even given our best
efforts, real development is a messy and imperfect process. there is
no reason to hide this from the community.
there are pragmatic reasons for retention. occasionally, rogue
artifacts turn up possibly years down the line. it's a lot easier to
verify and understand them if the original tags are preserved.
- robert
Re: If you see a ton of changes next time you diff trunk blame me...
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 2/10/07, James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com> wrote:
> So I accidentally deleted trunk...(I blame eclipse, I swear I did not
> even touch my trunk checkout at all)
wow! would that be a bug or just an undocumented feature ;-)
what version of which plugin are you using for svn access?
> It should be back now to the state it was directly before I deleted it.
> On my machine after doing a diff I see a bunch of incoming files but
> when I compare the two files I see no actual changes...just a
> consequence of the delete and revert?
i've take a quick look and it's beyond me
a number of the subversion developers are in the apache infrastructure
team. might be worth seeing if anyone's hanging out on IRC who might
be able to shed some more light on what exactly happened...
- robert
Adding a new component to bug database
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
I'm adding "layouts" as separate from widgets. Will move existing bugs
there as applicable.
James M
Where to next and using JIRA for task tracking.
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
1. We should use JIRA for task tracking, not just bugs. Will make life easier for coordination, testing, etc.
2. We should start a discussion about next steps. Some thing I have in mind:
Performance of all kinds. (Startup and shutdown, memory, etc)
Drag drop support
Better table/tree/treeTable
General rounding out of widgets
Continuous code cleanup
Better documentation, both jsdoc and more general how to build, run, get started, etc
Potentially integrating some Yahoo UI widgets.
---
The last one requires a bit of explanation. YUI has come a long way in a short amount of time, as has YUI-EXT. (Extra widgets and functionality) YUI code is very nice and the documentation is also very nice. YUI widgets also look very nice and seem pretty stable and functional.
I am particularly interested in tree and table. (And some combination of those into a treetable??) A proper table has a lot of functionality - column sorting, resizing, swapping, one-click editors, etc. Maintaining our own table is pretty painful.
However there are some benefits in that our table is a combined tree/table/treeTable in one set of code. AFAIK neither Dojo nor YUI have a good tree table.
I would like to at least do some investigation into YUI. There are many factors to consider - will it integrate with Dojo loading code (and do we even want to do that), is it easier to work with?
The main thing I like about YUI is the level of polish it has. It doesn't cover nearly the breadth of the Dojo libs but what it does do it seems to do better.
James Margaris
Don't bother trying my box pane "fixes"
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
The fixes I made hang IE6 and content comes out the wrong height on IE7...
I'll check in a better set of fixes in the next 24 hours, as soon as I can work through a dojo bug where setOuterHeight() doesn't work for tables...
James Margaris
Whole bunch of changes
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
Ive checked in all the changes I've made recently, including the new
logging stuff and removal of a bunch of old/unused junk, along with some
refactoring.
Unit tests run but I'm sure I messed something up in the merge. Will
check again tonight on my home machine for incoming changes and try all
the samples/demos.
James Margaris
RE: XAP 0.3.0 tag
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
So I created a 'XAP_0.3.0_RC2'
If nobody objects I will delete the old one, as it serves no purpose.
And start checking things into trunk again. I'll wait till at least
Sunday afternoon/evening EST to do either.
James Margaris
-----Original Message-----
From: James Margaris [mailto:jmargaris@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 6:52 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: XAP 0.3.0 tag
The last tag we put down is pretty out of date, I'm going to replace the
stuff there with the latest from repository. The tag is supposed to
reflect the release but since it was made there have been a lot of
changes.
I also want to check a bunch of things in at some point soon. As the
release is nearing completion does anyone mind if I check stuff into the
trunk and we do the release off the tag? That would mean that we have to
make changes in both the tag and trunk, but hopefully those will be
minor license changes.
I am a big fan of continuous integration, I'm afraid that the longer I
wait the more my changes will diverge from what other people are working
on, and I have a *lot* of changes.
James Margaris
If you see a ton of changes next time you diff trunk blame me...
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
So I accidentally deleted trunk...(I blame eclipse, I swear I did not
even touch my trunk checkout at all)
It should be back now to the state it was directly before I deleted it.
On my machine after doing a diff I see a bunch of incoming files but
when I compare the two files I see no actual changes...just a
consequence of the delete and revert?
James Margaris
XAP 0.3.0 tag
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
The last tag we put down is pretty out of date, I'm going to replace the
stuff there with the latest from repository. The tag is supposed to
reflect the release but since it was made there have been a lot of
changes.
I also want to check a bunch of things in at some point soon. As the
release is nearing completion does anyone mind if I check stuff into the
trunk and we do the release off the tag? That would mean that we have to
make changes in both the tag and trunk, but hopefully those will be
minor license changes.
I am a big fan of continuous integration, I'm afraid that the longer I
wait the more my changes will diverge from what other people are working
on, and I have a *lot* of changes.
James Margaris
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>.
To clarify a bit, dojo has some supporting files that are html and css
only, no code. These do not have any license headers, although they are
clearly part of the dojo codebase.
I don't think it makes sense for us to slap on an Apache license, nor
does it make sense to slap on a dojo license.
It seems to me that if dojo can distribute these files without a license
header that we should as well?
James Margaris
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
fix all the issues that were found.
One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
Dojo repository.
I have posted a release candidate at:
http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
+1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
release. For more information on the voting process, please review
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
the packages because...
Here is my +1
Bob (Buffone)
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Michael Turyn <MT...@nexaweb.com>.
+1 vote for the release from me.
RE: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Posted by Trevor Oldak <TO...@nexaweb.com>.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Buffone [mailto:rbuffone@nexaweb.com]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:53 PM
To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: XAP 0.3.0 Release Candidate Vote
Thanks for the work over the last week to get the release together and
fix all the issues that were found.
One thing to note: RAT has been run on all source files and any license
issue related to XAP has been fixed. Robert, thanks for looking at the
licensing and introducing the RAT tool it was a big help. Some template
files (.html and .css) under Dojo don't have a license and don't in the
Dojo repository.
I have posted a release candidate at:
http://people.apache.org/~bbuffone/xap-release/
Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours, and passes if at least three
+1 votes are cast. Then the Apache Incubator must vote to allow this
release. For more information on the voting process, please review
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes.
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache XAP 0.3.0 [ ] -1 Do not release
the packages because...
Here is my +1
Bob (Buffone)