You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@uima.apache.org by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> on 2016/07/26 19:32:06 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA-DUCC 2.1.0 RC3 - issue summary
Summarizing this long thread as of July 26:
1. missing "issues fixed" in source release bundle
2. java doc issues (not a blocker)
3. artifact name conventions not followed (not a blocker)
4. LaTeX build on Windows no longer works (not a blocker - says only to build on
linux)
5. Migration instructions (including run db_create) missing in README and
RELEASE_NOTES.
6. Power little-endian support added but not mentioned (not a blocker)
7. Wrong images for ducc-webserver - showing "TEST" (not a blocker)
8. cryptic / misleading comments and format in License files
9. some previous Notices dropped, need some confirmation.
10. links to creative commons licenses are indirect (via another website),
increasing the risk of future breakage.
Some of these border on blockers (1, 8, 9, 10).
This number of things I think warrants another RC, unless someone wants to
strongly advocate another position.
-Marshall
Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA-DUCC 2.1.0 RC3 - issue summary
Posted by Jaroslaw Cwiklik <ui...@gmail.com>.
Marshall, I will redo the RC.
DUCC runs on *nix only so not sure I want to spend time figuring out why
this is not building docs on windows (Issue#4)
Probably will not address #2 and #7. Instead will create JIRAs to fix these
in the future.
The rest I and the others will address in the next RC
Jerry
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
> Summarizing this long thread as of July 26:
>
> 1. missing "issues fixed" in source release bundle
> 2. java doc issues (not a blocker)
> 3. artifact name conventions not followed (not a blocker)
> 4. LaTeX build on Windows no longer works (not a blocker - says only to
> build on
> linux)
> 5. Migration instructions (including run db_create) missing in README and
> RELEASE_NOTES.
> 6. Power little-endian support added but not mentioned (not a blocker)
> 7. Wrong images for ducc-webserver - showing "TEST" (not a blocker)
> 8. cryptic / misleading comments and format in License files
> 9. some previous Notices dropped, need some confirmation.
> 10. links to creative commons licenses are indirect (via another website),
> increasing the risk of future breakage.
>
> Some of these border on blockers (1, 8, 9, 10).
>
> This number of things I think warrants another RC, unless someone wants to
> strongly advocate another position.
>
> -Marshall
>
>
>