You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@trafficcontrol.apache.org by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> on 2016/11/08 22:27:17 UTC
[VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Hello All,
I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
Changes since 1.7.0:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
This corresponds to git:
Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Which can be verified with the following:
git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
My code signing key is available here:
http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x6F7762B8&op=vindex
(Note that I am using a new key since RC0)
Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
RPMs for all products are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC1/
The vote is open until Wednesday, November 16, 2016.
Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Eric...
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> I just filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-39 as well for some
> other LICENSE issues.
>
>
> On Nov 10, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 10, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
>
> Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
> please keep testing!
>
>
>
> Nice! The process is working :-).
>
> — leif
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
I just filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-39 as well for some other LICENSE issues.
On Nov 10, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Nov 10, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>> wrote:
fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
please keep testing!
Nice! The process is working :-).
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
I just filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-39 as well for some other LICENSE issues.
On Nov 10, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Nov 10, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>> wrote:
fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
please keep testing!
Nice! The process is working :-).
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 10, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
>
> Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
> please keep testing!
Nice! The process is working :-).
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 10, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
>
> Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
> please keep testing!
Nice! The process is working :-).
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
please keep testing!
Thanks.. Dan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> Which can be verified with the following:
>
> git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> My code signing key is available here:
> http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x6F7762B8&op=vindex
> (Note that I am using a new key since RC0)
>
> Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
>
> RPMs for all products are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC1/
>
> The vote is open until Wednesday, November 16, 2016.
>
> Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for looking at that, Leif.. I'm sure we have a few more
details to get right.. I'm pretty sure most of those are from
external sources, so need to be added to NOTICE..
-Dan
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>>
>> Changes since 1.7.0:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1>
>
> I ran RAT against the current git master, and it found a few potentially missing licenses:
>
> http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT <http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT>
>
>
> I can’t (right now at least) easily test / verify the RPM source artifacts, but if any of those files are in any of those RPMs / SRPMs, you might need to update the license. The exception being files/packages where you’ve imported from an external source, in which case they should be marked in the NOTICE file (but, I don’t see any such entries, other than the primary contribution notice from Comcast and Cisco).
>
> This is pretty important, it’d likely get a -1 from IPMC if you haven’t got all this right :-).
>
> Cheers,
>
> — leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1>
I ran RAT against the current git master, and it found a few potentially missing licenses:
http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT <http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT>
I can’t (right now at least) easily test / verify the RPM source artifacts, but if any of those files are in any of those RPMs / SRPMs, you might need to update the license. The exception being files/packages where you’ve imported from an external source, in which case they should be marked in the NOTICE file (but, I don’t see any such entries, other than the primary contribution notice from Comcast and Cisco).
This is pretty important, it’d likely get a -1 from IPMC if you haven’t got all this right :-).
Cheers,
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1>
I ran RAT against the current git master, and it found a few potentially missing licenses:
http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT <http://pastebin.com/EQKZgSzT>
I can’t (right now at least) easily test / verify the RPM source artifacts, but if any of those files are in any of those RPMs / SRPMs, you might need to update the license. The exception being files/packages where you’ve imported from an external source, in which case they should be marked in the NOTICE file (but, I don’t see any such entries, other than the primary contribution notice from Comcast and Cisco).
This is pretty important, it’d likely get a -1 from IPMC if you haven’t got all this right :-).
Cheers,
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>.
fyi -- we are -1 on this because of these two issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-24
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-37
Another RC will be created after these are resolved.. However,
please keep testing!
Thanks.. Dan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> Which can be verified with the following:
>
> git tag -v RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> My code signing key is available here:
> http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?search=0x6F7762B8&op=vindex
> (Note that I am using a new key since RC0)
>
> Make sure you refresh from a key server to get all relevant signatures.
>
> RPMs for all products are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC1/
>
> The vote is open until Wednesday, November 16, 2016.
>
> Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
ok -- tarball and armored signatures are now included in
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/trafficcontrol/1.8.0/RC1/
. Adding that to the instructions for future release mgrs...
I'll work on getting the NOTICE updated and creating a KEYS file as
well. Once those are done, we'll move on to RC2..
thanks! Dan
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 6:46 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Dan-
>> I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a package for astats.
>>
>> A few other things:
>> - Package name should have “incubating” in it
>> - Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
>> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
>> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics <https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics>
>
> Yes, this is very important, you must have a GPG signature. Also, you should make sure it’s easy / possible to get the public key of the person that created these artifacts, ideally signed by other trusted people.
>
> See e.g. https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/trafficserver/KEYS
>
> Cheers,
>
> — leif
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 6:46 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Dan-
> I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a package for astats.
>
> A few other things:
> - Package name should have “incubating” in it
> - Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics <https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics>
Yes, this is very important, you must have a GPG signature. Also, you should make sure it’s easy / possible to get the public key of the person that created these artifacts, ideally signed by other trusted people.
See e.g. https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/trafficserver/KEYS
Cheers,
— leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Dave.. should the tarball include the git revision ids and
RC1 as well?
traffic_control_incubating-1.8.0-4549.bebf63ee-RC1.tar.gz
Dan
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 10:14 AM, David Neuman <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we need to include a source tarball that contains the project name
> and "incubating" (e.g. traffic_control_incubating_1.8.0_source.tar.gz).
> We can also include the RPMs but we should note that they are for
> convenience only and therefore they shouldnt need incubating in the name.
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Eric..
>>
>> I'll get the signatures in there, too and look into astats..
>> Suggestions on the form of the package name? e.g.
>>
>> traffic_ops-incubator-1.8.0-RC1-xxxx.xxxx.x86_64.rpm ?
>>
>> -dan
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
>> <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
>> > Hey Dan-
>> > I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a
>> package for astats.
>> >
>> > A few other things:
>> > - Package name should have “incubating” in it
>> > - Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached
>> sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
>> > https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
>> > https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics
>> >
>> >
>> > On Nov 8, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com<mailto:dang
>> ogh@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Leif, we are aware of that and want to get to that point. We've
>> > traditionally been Centos-based, and the rpm building is already
>> > implemented. That's intended as a nicety to make testing the RC
>> > easier.. I, for one, would love to eliminate building rpm's...
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org<mailto:
>> zwoop@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@apache.org<mailto:dan
>> gogh@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>> >
>> > Changes since 1.7.0:
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/
>> compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>> >
>> > This corresponds to git:
>> > Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
>> > Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>> >
>> >
>> > Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that
>> someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an
>> OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have
>> source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > — Leif
>> >
>> >
>>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by David Neuman <da...@gmail.com>.
I think we need to include a source tarball that contains the project name
and "incubating" (e.g. traffic_control_incubating_1.8.0_source.tar.gz).
We can also include the RPMs but we should note that they are for
convenience only and therefore they shouldnt need incubating in the name.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Eric..
>
> I'll get the signatures in there, too and look into astats..
> Suggestions on the form of the package name? e.g.
>
> traffic_ops-incubator-1.8.0-RC1-xxxx.xxxx.x86_64.rpm ?
>
> -dan
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
> <ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> > Hey Dan-
> > I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a
> package for astats.
> >
> > A few other things:
> > - Package name should have “incubating” in it
> > - Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached
> sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
> > https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
> > https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics
> >
> >
> > On Nov 8, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@gmail.com<mailto:dang
> ogh@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leif, we are aware of that and want to get to that point. We've
> > traditionally been Centos-based, and the rpm building is already
> > implemented. That's intended as a nicety to make testing the RC
> > easier.. I, for one, would love to eliminate building rpm's...
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org<mailto:
> zwoop@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <dangogh@apache.org<mailto:dan
> gogh@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
> >
> > Changes since 1.7.0:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/
> compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
> >
> > This corresponds to git:
> > Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> > Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
> >
> >
> > Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that
> someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an
> OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have
> source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > — Leif
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Eric..
I'll get the signatures in there, too and look into astats..
Suggestions on the form of the package name? e.g.
traffic_ops-incubator-1.8.0-RC1-xxxx.xxxx.x86_64.rpm ?
-dan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri)
<ef...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Hey Dan-
> I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a package for astats.
>
> A few other things:
> - Package name should have “incubating” in it
> - Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Leif, we are aware of that and want to get to that point. We've
> traditionally been Centos-based, and the rpm building is already
> implemented. That's intended as a nicety to make testing the RC
> easier.. I, for one, would love to eliminate building rpm's...
>
> Dan
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
>
> Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
>
> Cheers,
>
> — Leif
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by "Eric Friedrich (efriedri)" <ef...@cisco.com>.
Hey Dan-
I haven’t looked at the RPMs yet, but I think we also need to put up a package for astats.
A few other things:
- Package name should have “incubating” in it
- Need signatures directly on the release packages (i.e. 1 detached sig per RPM/SRPM), see these:
https://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid
https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basics
On Nov 8, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Leif, we are aware of that and want to get to that point. We've
traditionally been Centos-based, and the rpm building is already
implemented. That's intended as a nicety to make testing the RC
easier.. I, for one, would love to eliminate building rpm's...
Dan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org>> wrote:
Hello All,
I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
Changes since 1.7.0:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
This corresponds to git:
Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
Cheers,
— Leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Dan Kirkwood <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Leif, we are aware of that and want to get to that point. We've
traditionally been Centos-based, and the rpm building is already
implemented. That's intended as a nicety to make testing the RC
easier.. I, for one, would love to eliminate building rpm's...
Dan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>>
>> Changes since 1.7.0:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>>
>> This corresponds to git:
>> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
>> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
>
> Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
>
> Cheers,
>
> — Leif
>
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
Cheers,
— Leif
Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Dan Kirkwood <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC1)
>
> Changes since 1.7.0:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
>
> This corresponds to git:
> Hash: bebf63eedce2d3912752c65b0d52d739f820e0ac
> Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC1
Hmmm, quick question: Why RPMs? That seems pretty restrictive, in that someone could not download / test / look at any of this without having an OS distro that supports RPM… It’d be preferable (IMO at least) to have source artifacts as regular tar-balls (gzip / bzip2’d).
Cheers,
— Leif