Re: [VOTE] Apache Cayenne 5.0 Milestone 2 Release

Ah great. Thanks for doing that.

> On Jun 24, 2026, at 8:29=E2=80=AFAM, Michael Gentry =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> Yeah, I got the files published yesterday and was going to do the
> announcement, website update, etc, today.
>=20
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 8:01=E2=80=AFAM Andrus Adamchik =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
>> We were actually thinking with Nikita to pre-build and commit the =
.exe
>> launcher, so that Windows assemblies could be done on any platform.
>>=20
>> So I see the files are published. Let me try to find time and write =
the
>> announcement.
>>=20
>> Thanks,
>> Andrus
>>=20
>>=20
>>> On Jun 22, 2026, at 2:26=E2=80=AFPM, Michael Gentry =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Excluding Windows...
>>>=20
>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 2:16=E2=80=AFPM Andrus Adamchik =
<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> Congrats! And now we have more than one person who knows how to do =
it :)
>>>>=20
>>>>> On Jun 22, 2026, at 1:48=E2=80=AFPM, Michael Gentry =
<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Here's the final voting result:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Andrus Adamchik (PMC): +1
>>>>> Nikita Timofeev (PMC): +1
>>>>> John Huss (PMC): +1
>>>>> Michael Gentry (PMC): +1
>>>>>=20
>>>>> We'll get the release publicly published shortly.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Thank you everyone!
>>>>>=20
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 1:10=E2=80=AFPM John Huss =
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> I am +1 as well.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 12:02=E2=80=AFPM Michael Gentry =
<[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> I've updated my scripts that check for files that aren't =
properly
>>>>>> licensed
>>>>>>> and saw the two I missed before. I think these can be fixed for =
the
>>>> next
>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Everything checks out on my end, so I'm also a +1.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> mrg
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 6:14=E2=80=AFAM Nikita Timofeev <
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> - sources parity - good
>>>>>>>> - signatures - good (Windows assembly is signed with my key)
>>>>>>>> - full build from sources - good
>>>>>>>> - MacOS Modeler and MCP - runs on MacOS, JDK 25
>>>>>>>> - Generic Modeler and MCP - runs on MacOS, JDK 25 and 21
>>>>>>>> - Windows Modeler - runs on Windows 11, JDK 25 unsupported, =
only JDK
>>>> 21
>>>>>>>> checked
>>>>>>>> - RAT - missing headers in TestMcpServer.java and in
>>>>>>>> org.slf4j.spi.SLF4JServiceProvider
>>>>>>>> (we have headers in other providers). Good enough for the =
milestone
>>>>>>>> release, it may be fixed later.
>>>>>>>> - Staging Maven repo - good, verified with a demo project
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Also a note about the RAT: a bunch of new `.md` files are not
>>>> excluded,
>>>>>>>> need to fix config.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2026 at 8:01=E2=80=AFPM Andrus Adamchik <
>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Ok, to back up my intuition on the license headers I am going =
to
>> lean
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> the "lack of creativity" exception and "PMC judgement" clause =
in
>> the
>>>>>>> ASF
>>>>>>>>> policy :)
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Andrus
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2026, at 11:53=E2=80=AFAM, Andrus Adamchik <
>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> I am +1. I added MCP checks to my previous checklist (and =
they
>>>>>> pass).
>>>>>>>>> Haven't tested Modeler on Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> Noticed the Mac .dmg doesn't have the background image and =
our
>>>>>> custom
>>>>>>>>> layout. The contents of the .dmg are correct though, so this =
is
>> not a
>>>>>>>>> blocker either. (I've seen my own builds losing the layout on =
rare
>>>>>>>>> occasions; never got to the bottom of it though).
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> One of the unit tests was missing the Apache header (my =
fault, I
>>>>>>> fixed
>>>>>>>>> that already on the "past-M2" branch). I don't think this
>>>>>> disqualifies
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> release. This is an internal unit test, and is not expected to =
be
>>>>>>>>> referenced or embedded by the end users in their code. Also =
the new
>>>>>> .md
>>>>>>>>> files don't have Apache headers, which I think is totally ok.
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> Anyone has a different opinion on this?
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> Andrus
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 13, 2026, at 12:20=E2=80=AFPM, Michael Gentry <
>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone!
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Finally time for the 5.0 M2 release!
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Nikita and Andrus for helping with my environmental
>> issues!
>>>>>>>>>>> Hopefully smoother in the future. (I'll have to give Windows =
the
>>>>>>>> stinky
>>>>>>>>>>> eye.)
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Release Notes:
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>> =
https://github.com/apache/cayenne/blob/cayenne-parent-5.0-M2/RELEASE-NOTES=
.txt
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Maven Repo:
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>> =
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecayenne-1063/
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Assemblies (Note the updated KEYS file there):
>>>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cayenne/
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Please evaluate the assemblies and cast your votes.
>>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> mrg
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Nikita Timofeev
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>=20
>>=20