Grokbase Groups Cayenne dev May 2007
FAQ
I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases. Release
artifacts we are voting on are available here:

http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the ASF legal
guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and is a legacy
compatibility release. Please review and vote.

Thanks
Andrus

Search Discussions

  • Kevin Menard at May 7, 2007 at 4:32 pm
    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested 2.0.3 against
    HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Andrus Adamchik
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:18 PM
    To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
    Subject: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases.
    Release artifacts we are voting on are available here:

    http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
    http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

    As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the
    ASF legal guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and
    is a legacy compatibility release. Please review and vote.

    Thanks
    Andrus
  • Tore Halset at May 7, 2007 at 6:16 pm
    +1

    I have tested 1.2.3 with Derby, PostgreSQL and HSQLDB. All worked
    fine after I learned that cayenne unit tests need a PostgreSQL base
    with plpgsql.

    - Tore.
    On May 7, 2007, at 18:18, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases. Release
    artifacts we are voting on are available here:

    http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
    http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

    As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the ASF
    legal guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and is a
    legacy compatibility release. Please review and vote.

    Thanks
    Andrus
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 8, 2007 at 7:29 am
    +1

    On May 7, 2007, at 7:18 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases. Release
    artifacts we are voting on are available here:

    http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
    http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

    As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the ASF
    legal guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and is a
    legacy compatibility release. Please review and vote.

    Thanks
    Andrus
  • Kevin Menard at May 10, 2007 at 12:20 pm
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested 2.0.3
    against HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All
    worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 10, 2007 at 3:29 pm
    IMO you are correct - only PMC member votes are binding. But there
    are two things to note in this respect: (1) input from committers is
    always taken into account - I don't think there's been instances when
    we ignored such input on matters requiring a vote; (2) PMC is not
    some elite caste - IMO we should expand/contract it as needed to
    include people who contribute to the project and to the community.
    And in fact I am planning to act on item (2).

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested 2.0.3
    against HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All
    worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 10, 2007 at 3:35 pm
    Talking of which - we need one more vote from a PMC member. Any of
    the remaining members have time to check the release and vote?

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    IMO you are correct - only PMC member votes are binding. But there
    are two things to note in this respect: (1) input from committers
    is always taken into account - I don't think there's been instances
    when we ignored such input on matters requiring a vote; (2) PMC is
    not some elite caste - IMO we should expand/contract it as needed
    to include people who contribute to the project and to the
    community. And in fact I am planning to act on item (2).

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested 2.0.3
    against HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All
    worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Michael Gentry at May 10, 2007 at 3:44 pm
    I've been too busy (work and personal) to check out the release artifacts,
    which is why I haven't chimed in. I *could* just add an obligatory +1, but
    that doesn't feel right and I was hoping others had more time to do abetter
    checkout. The only thing I noticed when I took a very quick cursory look is
    that the 1.2.3 release Tore put together doesn't have checksum files, but I
    consider this a non-issue.

    Thanks,

    /dev/mrg

    On 5/10/07, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    Talking of which - we need one more vote from a PMC member. Any of
    the remaining members have time to check the release and vote?

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    IMO you are correct - only PMC member votes are binding. But there
    are two things to note in this respect: (1) input from committers
    is always taken into account - I don't think there's been instances
    when we ignored such input on matters requiring a vote; (2) PMC is
    not some elite caste - IMO we should expand/contract it as needed
    to include people who contribute to the project and to the
    community. And in fact I am planning to act on item (2).

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested 2.0.3
    against HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All
    worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 10, 2007 at 3:46 pm

    On May 10, 2007, at 6:43 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:

    I *could* just add an obligatory +1, but
    that doesn't feel right and I was hoping others had more time to do
    abetter
    checkout. agreed
    The only thing I noticed when I took a very quick cursory look is
    that the 1.2.3 release Tore put together doesn't have checksum
    files, but I
    consider this a non-issue.
    Yep - we just following our old pre-apache release procedure that
    didn't include checksums or sigs.

    Andrus
  • Kevin Menard at May 10, 2007 at 3:39 pm
    Thanks for the response. My concern certainly wasn't either points 1 or
    2 that you addressed. The bigger issue is that in about an hour the
    vote will have been open for 72 hours and as of now there have only been
    two binding votes cast; three are necessary for the vote to pass . . .

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Andrus Adamchik
    Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:29 AM
    To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
    Subject: Re: Binding votes (WAS: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3
    and 2.0.3)

    IMO you are correct - only PMC member votes are binding. But
    there are two things to note in this respect: (1) input from
    committers is always taken into account - I don't think
    there's been instances when we ignored such input on matters
    requiring a vote; (2) PMC is not some elite caste - IMO we
    should expand/contract it as needed to include people who
    contribute to the project and to the community.
    And in fact I am planning to act on item (2).

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the
    distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested
    2.0.3 against
    HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Mike Kienenberger at May 10, 2007 at 3:44 pm
    The vote should be open at least 72 hours, but it can be open as long
    as necessary.

    I will try to find time to look at the release tonight, but I have a
    lot of non-computer-related issues to deal with at this time.

    On 5/10/07, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Thanks for the response. My concern certainly wasn't either points 1 or
    2 that you addressed. The bigger issue is that in about an hour the
    vote will have been open for 72 hours and as of now there have only been
    two binding votes cast; three are necessary for the vote to pass . . .

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Andrus Adamchik
    Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:29 AM
    To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
    Subject: Re: Binding votes (WAS: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3
    and 2.0.3)

    IMO you are correct - only PMC member votes are binding. But
    there are two things to note in this respect: (1) input from
    committers is always taken into account - I don't think
    there's been instances when we ignored such input on matters
    requiring a vote; (2) PMC is not some elite caste - IMO we
    should expand/contract it as needed to include people who
    contribute to the project and to the community.
    And in fact I am planning to act on item (2).

    Andrus

    On May 10, 2007, at 3:20 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    Hmm . . . I just reviewed the voting procedure and noticed that
    technically my +1 is non-binding. Do we make the
    distinction between
    PMC members and committers for project releases?

    --
    Kevin
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kevin Menard
    Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:32 PM
    To: 'dev@cayenne.apache.org'
    Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3 and 2.0.3

    +1

    FYI, I was involved in the release process and tested
    2.0.3 against
    HSQLDB, Derby, PostgreSQL 8.2, and MySQL 5. All worked for me.

    --
    Kevin
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 10, 2007 at 3:45 pm

    On May 10, 2007, at 6:38 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:

    The bigger issue is that in about an hour the
    vote will have been open for 72 hours and as of now there have only
    been
    two binding votes cast; three are necessary for the vote to pass . . .
    I think we'll just give it more time until one other member has a
    chance to review the release. 72 hours is a minimal time for vote
    closing, but we can reasonably extend it to accommodate people's
    schedules.

    Andrus
  • Kevin Menard at May 10, 2007 at 3:52 pm

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Andrus Adamchik
    Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:45 AM
    To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
    Subject: Re: Binding votes (WAS: [VOTE] Release Cayenne 1.2.3
    and 2.0.3)

    I think we'll just give it more time until one other member
    has a chance to review the release. 72 hours is a minimal
    time for vote closing, but we can reasonably extend it to
    accommodate people's schedules.
    Right. At the same time, hopefully a little prodding might help a
    release sitting in limbo. I didn't want anyone to think that my +1
    meant that we had the three necessary.

    --
    Kevin
  • Bill Dudney at May 15, 2007 at 3:19 pm
    Looks good,

    +1 on both.

    The doc/index.html both have a link to 'Commercial Support' that gets
    a 404 on our site;

    http://cayenne.apache.org/cayenne-commercial-support.html

    Great work!

    TTFN,

    -bd-
    On May 7, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases. Release
    artifacts we are voting on are available here:

    http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
    http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

    As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the ASF
    legal guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and is a
    legacy compatibility release. Please review and vote.

    Thanks
    Andrus
  • Andrus Adamchik at May 15, 2007 at 8:30 pm
    Bill, thanks for chiming in. So now we can officially close the vote
    with the following results:

    Kevin Menard +1
    Tore Halset +1 (PMC)
    Andrus Adamchik +1 (PMC)
    Bill Dudney +1 (PMC)

    I will publish the artifacts and make an announcement (hopefully)
    tomorrow.

    Thanks
    Andrus

    On May 15, 2007, at 6:18 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
    Looks good,

    +1 on both.

    The doc/index.html both have a link to 'Commercial Support' that
    gets a 404 on our site;

    http://cayenne.apache.org/cayenne-commercial-support.html

    Great work!

    TTFN,

    -bd-
    On May 7, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    I'd like to start a vote on the 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 releases. Release
    artifacts we are voting on are available here:

    http://people.apache.org/~torehalset/release/1.2.3/
    http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/2.0.3/

    As a reminder, only 2.0.3 release must fully adhere to the ASF
    legal guidelines; 1.2.3 will be posted on SourceForge and is a
    legacy compatibility release. Please review and vote.

    Thanks
    Andrus

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categoriescayenne
postedMay 7, '07 at 4:18p
activeMay 15, '07 at 8:30p
posts15
users6
websitecayenne.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase