You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> on 2010/02/07 22:30:54 UTC
[VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
shell 1.4.2
bundlerepository 1.4.3
framework 2.0.3
framework.security 1.0.0
main 2.0.3
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
Usage:
sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Pierre De Rop <pi...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non binding);
regards;
/pierre
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
> signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Jaroslav Tulach <Ja...@Sun.COM>.
+1
I can confirm that
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/org/apache/felix/org.apache.felix.framework/2.0.3/org.apache.felix.framework-2.0.3.jar
is good enough for NetBeans purposes.
-jst
Dne neděle 07 února 2010 22:30:54 Karl Pauls napsal(a):
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
> signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 22:30, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com>.
+1
Karl Pauls wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
Verified framework fixes for Karaf issues.
Chris
--
Chris Custine
FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
Apache Felix :: http://felix.apache.org
Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
> signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 09.02.2010 21:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 09.02.2010 20:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
>>>>> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
>>>>> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
>>>>
>>>> Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
>>>> that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
>>>> odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
>>>
>>> The point is that discrepancy between Maven's version number
>>> interpreation of x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and OSGi's interpretation of the
>>> converted number x.y.z.SNAPSHOT. In Maven the SNAPSHOT version is
>>> "lower" than the x.y.z release version. In OSGi the SNAPSHOT version is
>>> higher.
>>>
>>> Therefore we started a convetion of having odd SNAPSHOTs (like
>>> 1.4.3-SNAPSHOT) and even releases (like 1.4.4) to ensure proper
>>> linearity. I initially proposed this for micro version only, Richard
>>> extended this to minor versions.
>>>
>>> To me it is mostly important, that the release version is higher than a
>>> SNAPSHOT version in OSGi understanding...
>>
>> Well, right, but that is why we as of now did it a little different
>> for the framework. We develop against 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT at the moment.
>> That will not be released but become 2.2.0 (or higher). If we along
>> the way see the need to make a micro release we do one but that should
>> be lower as the 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT and we never had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT. In
>> other words we have 2.0.2 < 2.0.3 < 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT < 2.2. I think that
>> is correct as well - it would be different if we had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT
>> at one point in time but as we didn't we don't have a problem, no?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we shouldn't change this
> approach and if we really voted on this in the past then I'm sorry for
> not remembering. All I wanted to point out is that I think this
> approach follows your idea too. If you think we should find a common
> approach then we probably should open a new topic and stop talking on
> the release vote :-)
I don't get you wrong. And maybe we should differentiate between the
framework (which is primarily just a JAR file and is probably different,
or "the exception to the rule") and regular bundles.
I am more concerned with bundles and in thus the bundlerepository bundle
here.
Regards
Felix
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
>> regards,
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>> Regards
>>> Felix
>>>
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Felix
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>>>>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> shell 1.4.2
>>>>>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>>>>>> framework 2.0.3
>>>>>> framework.security 1.0.0
>>>>>> main 2.0.3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Staging repository:
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Usage:
>>>>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Karl Pauls
>> karlpauls@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 09.02.2010 20:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
>>>> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
>>>> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
>>>
>>> Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
>>> that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
>>> odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
>>
>> The point is that discrepancy between Maven's version number
>> interpreation of x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and OSGi's interpretation of the
>> converted number x.y.z.SNAPSHOT. In Maven the SNAPSHOT version is
>> "lower" than the x.y.z release version. In OSGi the SNAPSHOT version is
>> higher.
>>
>> Therefore we started a convetion of having odd SNAPSHOTs (like
>> 1.4.3-SNAPSHOT) and even releases (like 1.4.4) to ensure proper
>> linearity. I initially proposed this for micro version only, Richard
>> extended this to minor versions.
>>
>> To me it is mostly important, that the release version is higher than a
>> SNAPSHOT version in OSGi understanding...
>
> Well, right, but that is why we as of now did it a little different
> for the framework. We develop against 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT at the moment.
> That will not be released but become 2.2.0 (or higher). If we along
> the way see the need to make a micro release we do one but that should
> be lower as the 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT and we never had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT. In
> other words we have 2.0.2 < 2.0.3 < 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT < 2.2. I think that
> is correct as well - it would be different if we had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT
> at one point in time but as we didn't we don't have a problem, no?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we shouldn't change this
approach and if we really voted on this in the past then I'm sorry for
not remembering. All I wanted to point out is that I think this
approach follows your idea too. If you think we should find a common
approach then we probably should open a new topic and stop talking on
the release vote :-)
regards,
Karl
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
>> Regards
>> Felix
>>
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Felix
>>>>
>>>> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>>>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>>>>
>>>>> shell 1.4.2
>>>>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>>>>> framework 2.0.3
>>>>> framework.security 1.0.0
>>>>> main 2.0.3
>>>>>
>>>>> Staging repository:
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>>>>
>>>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>>>
>>>>> Usage:
>>>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Pauls
> karlpauls@gmail.com
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Guo Du <mr...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> other words we have 2.0.2 < 2.0.3 < 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT < 2.2. I think that
> is correct as well - it would be different if we had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT
> at one point in time but as we didn't we don't have a problem, no?
>
You are right for felix users.
But if some one develop on 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT and released to internal
snapshot repository, it could be hit by the problem. So it may worth
to promote as a best practice.
-Guo
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com>.
FWIW, I'm with Karl on this. This way you can leave the SNAPSHOT version
mostly unchanged for longer periods of time which is great for CI builds or
when you always want to test against the latest version. If you base the
current SNAPSHOTs on the micro versions then its a bit more work to keep
track of them after each release.
Either way, the OSGi versioning issue is avoided.
Chris
--
Chris Custine
FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
Apache Felix :: http://felix.apache.org
Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 09.02.2010 20:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
> >>> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
> >>> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to
> come.
> >>
> >> Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
> >> that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
> >> odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
> >
> > The point is that discrepancy between Maven's version number
> > interpreation of x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and OSGi's interpretation of the
> > converted number x.y.z.SNAPSHOT. In Maven the SNAPSHOT version is
> > "lower" than the x.y.z release version. In OSGi the SNAPSHOT version is
> > higher.
> >
> > Therefore we started a convetion of having odd SNAPSHOTs (like
> > 1.4.3-SNAPSHOT) and even releases (like 1.4.4) to ensure proper
> > linearity. I initially proposed this for micro version only, Richard
> > extended this to minor versions.
> >
> > To me it is mostly important, that the release version is higher than a
> > SNAPSHOT version in OSGi understanding...
>
> Well, right, but that is why we as of now did it a little different
> for the framework. We develop against 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT at the moment.
> That will not be released but become 2.2.0 (or higher). If we along
> the way see the need to make a micro release we do one but that should
> be lower as the 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT and we never had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT. In
> other words we have 2.0.2 < 2.0.3 < 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT < 2.2. I think that
> is correct as well - it would be different if we had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT
> at one point in time but as we didn't we don't have a problem, no?
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
> > Regards
> > Felix
> >
> >>
> >> regards,
> >>
> >> Karl
> >>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Felix
> >>>
> >>> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
> >>>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
> >>>>
> >>>> shell 1.4.2
> >>>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> >>>> framework 2.0.3
> >>>> framework.security 1.0.0
> >>>> main 2.0.3
> >>>>
> >>>> Staging repository:
> >>>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
> >>>>
> >>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
> signatures:
> >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
> >>>>
> >>>> Usage:
> >>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
> >>>>
> >>>> Please vote to approve this release:
> >>>>
> >>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> >>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Pauls
> karlpauls@gmail.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09.02.2010 20:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
>>> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
>>> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
>>
>> Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
>> that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
>> odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
>
> The point is that discrepancy between Maven's version number
> interpreation of x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and OSGi's interpretation of the
> converted number x.y.z.SNAPSHOT. In Maven the SNAPSHOT version is
> "lower" than the x.y.z release version. In OSGi the SNAPSHOT version is
> higher.
>
> Therefore we started a convetion of having odd SNAPSHOTs (like
> 1.4.3-SNAPSHOT) and even releases (like 1.4.4) to ensure proper
> linearity. I initially proposed this for micro version only, Richard
> extended this to minor versions.
>
> To me it is mostly important, that the release version is higher than a
> SNAPSHOT version in OSGi understanding...
Well, right, but that is why we as of now did it a little different
for the framework. We develop against 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT at the moment.
That will not be released but become 2.2.0 (or higher). If we along
the way see the need to make a micro release we do one but that should
be lower as the 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT and we never had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT. In
other words we have 2.0.2 < 2.0.3 < 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT < 2.2. I think that
is correct as well - it would be different if we had a 2.0.3-SNAPSHOT
at one point in time but as we didn't we don't have a problem, no?
regards,
Karl
> Regards
> Felix
>
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>> Regards
>>> Felix
>>>
>>> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>>>
>>>> shell 1.4.2
>>>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>>>> framework 2.0.3
>>>> framework.security 1.0.0
>>>> main 2.0.3
>>>>
>>>> Staging repository:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>>>
>>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>>
>>>> Usage:
>>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>>>
>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 09.02.2010 20:13, Karl Pauls wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
>> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
>> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
>
> Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
> that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
> odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
The point is that discrepancy between Maven's version number
interpreation of x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and OSGi's interpretation of the
converted number x.y.z.SNAPSHOT. In Maven the SNAPSHOT version is
"lower" than the x.y.z release version. In OSGi the SNAPSHOT version is
higher.
Therefore we started a convetion of having odd SNAPSHOTs (like
1.4.3-SNAPSHOT) and even releases (like 1.4.4) to ensure proper
linearity. I initially proposed this for micro version only, Richard
extended this to minor versions.
To me it is mostly important, that the release version is higher than a
SNAPSHOT version in OSGi understanding...
Regards
Felix
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
>> Regards
>> Felix
>>
>> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>>
>>> shell 1.4.2
>>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>>> framework 2.0.3
>>> framework.security 1.0.0
>>> main 2.0.3
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>>
>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>
>>> Usage:
>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>>
>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
> convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
> not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
Do we have the convention for micro releases too? We never followed
that for any release I did... Only for minor release numbers its the
odd/even game but not for micro releases no?
regards,
Karl
> Regards
> Felix
>
> On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>
>> shell 1.4.2
>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>> framework 2.0.3
>> framework.security 1.0.0
>> main 2.0.3
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>
>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>
>> Usage:
>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
+1
It looks like the framework and bundlerepository do not follow our
convention of using even release numbers (not a big issue and certainly
not a showstopper), but something to care for the next releases to come.
Regards
Felix
On 07.02.2010 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Clement Escoffier <cl...@gmail.com>.
+1,
Regards,
Clement
On 07.02.2010, at 22:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Clement Escoffier <cl...@gmail.com>.
On 08.02.2010, at 16:36, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> +1
>
> The new assembly for creating the convenience distro now includes the source for Main, is there any way to exclude this in future releases? Since it is a convenience binary release, it doesn't really make sense to include it.
Hi,
This is a small issue in the assembly configuration. I will fix that for the next release. The created assemblies of the next release will be exactly the same as what we did before (manually).
Regards,
Clement
>
> -> richard
>
> On 2/7/10 16:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>
>> shell 1.4.2
>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>> framework 2.0.3
>> framework.security 1.0.0
>> main 2.0.3
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>
>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>
>> Usage:
>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> The new assembly for creating the convenience distro now includes the source
> for Main, is there any way to exclude this in future releases? Since it is a
> convenience binary release, it doesn't really make sense to include it.
Yeah, that is a problem with the assembly plugin apparently. It does
do the correct thing for the normal package but on a release it
includes the sources. The way to go is to for the next release make
that a separate project. I just did notice it to late for this one (as
the problem only happens when we do a release). Not a showstopper so.
regards,
Karl
> -> richard
>
> On 2/7/10 16:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
>>
>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>
>> shell 1.4.2
>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>> framework 2.0.3
>> framework.security 1.0.0
>> main 2.0.3
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>
>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
>> signatures:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>
>> Usage:
>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
+1
The new assembly for creating the convenience distro now includes the
source for Main, is there any way to exclude this in future releases?
Since it is a convenience binary release, it doesn't really make sense
to include it.
-> richard
On 2/7/10 16:30, Karl Pauls wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
[X] +1 Approve the release
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject
releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
Time to call the vote on the framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases.
* +1 votes from Rob Walker, Guillaume Nodet, Jaroslav Tulach, Carsten
Ziegeler, Richard S. Hall, Clement Escoffier, Chris Custine, Pierre De
Rop, Felix Meschberger, and Karl Pauls
* No other votes
The vote is successful. I will make the release artifacts available as
soon as possible.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>>
>> shell 1.4.2
>> bundlerepository 1.4.3
>> framework 2.0.3
>> framework.security 1.0.0
>> main 2.0.3
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>>
>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>
>> Usage:
>> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Pauls
> karlpauls@gmail.com
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Felix framework 2.0.3 and related subproject releases
Posted by Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com>.
+1
regards,
Karl
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Karl Pauls <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
>
> shell 1.4.2
> bundlerepository 1.4.3
> framework 2.0.3
> framework.security 1.0.0
> main 2.0.3
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-001/
>
> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the signatures:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>
> Usage:
> sh check_staged_release.sh 001 /tmp/felix-staging
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>
--
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com