Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Code Block
languagetext
title\[VOTE\] Release Apache Daffodil 2.0.0-rc1
Hi all,

I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Daffodil 2.0.0-rc1.

All distribution packages, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/2.0.0-rc1/

Staging artifacts can be found at:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedaffodil-1000/

This release has been signed with PGP key 36F3494B033AE661, corresponding
to slawrence@apache.org, which is included in the KEYS file here:

https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS

The release candidate has been tagged in git with v2.0.0-rc1.

For reference, here is a list of all closed JIRAs tagged with 2.0.0:

https://s.apache.org/daffodil-issues-2.0.0

For a summary of the changes in this release, see:

https://daffodil.apache.org/releases/2.0.0/

Please review and vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 hours
(Sunday, 11 February 2018, 12 Noon EST).

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

Thanks,
- Steve

When committers test a new release candidate and vote for approving (or not approving it), they usually post a checklist showing what they verified to explain their vote.  A very thorough person might post an exhaustive checklist like the below one, although many post shorter checklists:

Code Block
languagetext
titleRE: \[VOTE\] Release Apache Daffodil v2.0.0-rc1
+1

[OK] verified signature of git tag
[OK] verified hashes and signatures of source and helper binaries
[OK] verified all signatures use key in KEYS with apache email address
[OK] verified source has no unexpected binary files
[OK] verified source and git tag are same minus KEYS file
[OK] verified source and helper binaries include LICENSE/NOTICE/README
[OK] verified LICENSE/NOTICE/README look correct
[OK] compiled source and ran all tests & ratCheck (LANG set to both en_US and de_DE)
[OK] verified jars built from source have same content as helper binary jars
[OK] verified JavaDoc and ScalaDoc docs look correct
[OK] verified dependencies in helper binaries are same as in maven poms
[OK] tested bin & msi & rpm installers and checked "daffodil --version" output from each
[OK] verified some public and private DFDL schema projects pass tests calling new release

If any issues are discovered during the vote, the vote can be canceled and an rc2 created after the issues have been fixed and merged. After the message below has been sent, follow the same procedures as if the vote didn't pass.

...