You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com> on 2011/11/23 06:17:06 UTC
[VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
All,
I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3 is available and ready for your testing and voting.
Release candidate artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC3/
SVN tag revision:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/tags/Lucene.Net_2_9_4_RC3/
The vote is open for 72 hours (we can extend this if people feel the US Thanksgiving holiday will impact the vote)
Thanks to the Lucene contributors and committers for their hard work, and special thanks to Stefan for helping me get this release ready to roll out the door.
Thanks,
~Prescott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-11-26, ant elder wrote:
> There was some helpful discussion about this in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the ML discussion
> around that, for example,
> http://apache.markmail.org/message/u66o5ucyfquxjl7i?q=LEGAL-59, and
> theres also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-62
Thanks!
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:50 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Can anybody please point me to the result of the conversation that
> defines our current understanding of what goes into NOTICE and what
> doesn't so I don't give bad advice to podlings? I'm pretty sure this
> must have changed over the years and I was conditioned with a different
> interpretation from what it is now.
>
> Is it
>
> <http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license>
> <http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-notice>
>
> (which fortunately don't disagree with each other)
>
> ?
>
I think a little while back it seemed to be understood that pretty
much any copyright you might find in the project code or any of the
licenses it used should be copied into the NOTICE file, and thats why
you see some NOTICE file with lots of content. Thats changed and now
the view is there are very few things that should actually be added to
the notice file.
The most authoritative place is the link those links already link to -
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice - which says "...The
remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party
notices.". The problem is that what are "required third-party notices"
is not really described anywhere.
There was some helpful discussion about this in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the ML discussion
around that, for example,
http://apache.markmail.org/message/u66o5ucyfquxjl7i?q=LEGAL-59, and
theres also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-62
...ant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-11-25, Benson Margulies wrote:
> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
> based on recent traffic here.
If anything this is a case of "ask and get three different answers" as
the Lucene.NET community added the stuff to the NOTICE file because I as
a mentor told them to. Sorry about that.
This is the same kind of acknowledgement the Lucene Java project has in
their NOTICE file as well, for example.
Can anybody please point me to the result of the conversation that
defines our current understanding of what goes into NOTICE and what
doesn't so I don't give bad advice to podlings? I'm pretty sure this
must have changed over the years and I was conditioned with a different
interpretation from what it is now.
Is it
<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license>
<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-notice>
(which fortunately don't disagree with each other)
?
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 08:18:49PM +0000, ant elder wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> > Not as frustrating as putting up a release candidate which twists in the wind
> > for weeks waiting for a IPMC member to review because Mentors are awol! The
> > few individuals who do this thankless work on a regular basis are crucial to
> > the functioning of the Incubator, and are doing far more than their share to
> > make up for a collective failure.
>
> If something is waiting for weeks then send reminder emails about it.
> Its easy to miss things and if a couple of days go past with all the
> email traffic they drop way off the bottom of a screen full of emails.
> Heck if even a couple of days go past start sending reminder emails
> every day.
The one project I am involved with in the Incubator (Lucy) is fortunate to
have a full contigent of engaged Mentors. One of our release votes took a
couple weeks, but the timing of that release wasn't a big deal and we chose to
be patient. Every time we have needed our Mentors, they have come through for
us.
On behalf of the many podlings whose releases candidates you've reviewed in
the past, though, and on behalf of the others who will need such review in the
future -- thank you.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
> Not as frustrating as putting up a release candidate which twists in the wind
> for weeks waiting for a IPMC member to review because Mentors are awol! The
> few individuals who do this thankless work on a regular basis are crucial to
> the functioning of the Incubator, and are doing far more than their share to
> make up for a collective failure.
If something is waiting for weeks then send reminder emails about it.
Its easy to miss things and if a couple of days go past with all the
email traffic they drop way off the bottom of a screen full of emails.
Heck if even a couple of days go past start sending reminder emails
every day.
...ant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 10:53:43AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> I think that some votes on this list are overly critical, often laden with
> personal opinions and not real Foundation requirements. This leads to a
> very frustrating experience to new podling members who are unable to tell
> the difference.
Not as frustrating as putting up a release candidate which twists in the wind
for weeks waiting for a IPMC member to review because Mentors are awol! The
few individuals who do this thankless work on a regular basis are crucial to
the functioning of the Incubator, and are doing far more than their share to
make up for a collective failure.
Note that if a release garners 3 +1 votes, it doesn't matter if it got any -1
votes:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Votes on Package Releases
Votes on whether a package is ready to be released follow a format similar
to majority approval -- except that the decision is officially determined
solely by whether at least three +1 votes were registered. *Releases may
not be vetoed.* Generally the community will cancel the release vote if
anyone identifies serious problems, but in most cases the ultimate
decision, once three or more positive votes have been garnered, lies with
the individual serving as release manager. The specifics of the process
may vary from project to project, but the 'minimum of three +1 votes' rule
is universal.
Thus, if other IPMC members are dissatisfied with the efforts of their fellow
volunteers, they have the power to overrule them so long as they are willing
to do the work.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Well, fine, I am happy to +1.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 25, 2011, at 8:32 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
>>> based on recent traffic here.
>>
>> LOL
>>
>>> Unfortunately, that conversation left me
>>> with a giant headache and no clear idea.
>>>
>>> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
>>> a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
>>>
>>
>> Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
>> blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
>> isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
>> that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
>> thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
>> something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later
>
> I am of the same opinion here. I think that some votes on this list are overly critical, often laden with personal opinions and not real Foundation requirements. This leads to a very frustrating experience to new podling members who are unable to tell the difference.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On Nov 25, 2011, at 8:32 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
>> based on recent traffic here.
>
> LOL
>
>> Unfortunately, that conversation left me
>> with a giant headache and no clear idea.
>>
>> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
>> a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
>>
>
> Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
> blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
> isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
> that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
> thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
> something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later
I am of the same opinion here. I think that some votes on this list are overly critical, often laden with personal opinions and not real Foundation requirements. This leads to a very frustrating experience to new podling members who are unable to tell the difference.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-11-25, ant elder wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is
>> not a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
> Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
> blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
> isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
> that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
> thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
> something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later
Agreed. I'll make sure it gets sorted out before the next release
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-458
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
> based on recent traffic here.
LOL
> Unfortunately, that conversation left me
> with a giant headache and no clear idea.
>
> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
> a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
>
Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later
...ant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
based on recent traffic here. Unfortunately, that conversation left me
with a giant headache and no clear idea.
The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2011-11-23, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 23 November 2011 05:17, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3 is available and ready for your testing and voting.
>
>
>>> Release candidate artifacts:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC3/
>
>> The source archive is missing several chunks of what is in the SVN tag.
>
>> None of the following directory trees are in the source archive:
>
>> branding/
>> docs/
>> lib/
>
> Yes, this is deliberate.
>
>> Are none of these needed for building/testing the software?
>
> lib contains tools that developers need to test or build certain parts.
> All of them can be downloaded separately and in fact many .NET
> developers will have their own copy of NUnit already. There is no point
> in bundling them with the release. They are in svn for convenience.
>
> See the last point in <https://cwiki.apache.org/LUCENENET/road-map.html>
>
> It is an issue the community will be addressing.
>
> branding and docs are website only things.
>
>> The SVN tag contains lots of .exe files under the lib tree.
>> Is it *really* necessary for these to be in SVN?
>
> See above.
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-11-23, sebb wrote:
> On 23 November 2011 05:17, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3 is available and ready for your testing and voting.
>> Release candidate artifacts:
>> http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC3/
> The source archive is missing several chunks of what is in the SVN tag.
> None of the following directory trees are in the source archive:
> branding/
> docs/
> lib/
Yes, this is deliberate.
> Are none of these needed for building/testing the software?
lib contains tools that developers need to test or build certain parts.
All of them can be downloaded separately and in fact many .NET
developers will have their own copy of NUnit already. There is no point
in bundling them with the release. They are in svn for convenience.
See the last point in <https://cwiki.apache.org/LUCENENET/road-map.html>
It is an issue the community will be addressing.
branding and docs are website only things.
> The SVN tag contains lots of .exe files under the lib tree.
> Is it *really* necessary for these to be in SVN?
See above.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 November 2011 05:17, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> All,
>
> I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3 is available and ready for your testing and voting.
>
>
> Release candidate artifacts:
> http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC3/
The source archive is missing several chunks of what is in the SVN tag.
None of the following directory trees are in the source archive:
branding/
docs/
lib/
Are none of these needed for building/testing the software?
If they are purely for building the web-site, then maybe that would be
cleaner as a separate SVN tree.
>
>
> SVN tag revision:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/tags/Lucene.Net_2_9_4_RC3/
The SVN tag contains lots of .exe files under the lib tree.
Is it *really* necessary for these to be in SVN?
For example, Gallio appears to be a test framework for NET.
Projects that use a Java test framework such as JUnit don't normally
include JUnit in their SVN, they just document it as a pre-requisite
or fetch it at run-time if necessary.
Similarly for the other .exe files.
>
>
> The vote is open for 72 hours (we can extend this if people feel the US Thanksgiving holiday will impact the vote)
>
>
>
> Thanks to the Lucene contributors and committers for their hard work, and special thanks to Stefan for helping me get this release ready to roll out the door.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> ~Prescott
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-11-23, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3 is
> available and ready for your testing and voting.
This release has one IPMC +1 so far (mine) and needs at least two more.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org