Matt, would you mind re-spinning a new build at 2.1.0-rc1?
On 1/19/18, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> wrote: > I finally looked at this. I pushed a change to app assembler config > to make the bin directory executable, and updated HOWTOBUILD to > mention you need to run mvn site:site first. > > Can we resin? > > On 11/13/17, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Another thing I noticed is that the downloads page needs to be updated to >> link to the (future) dist URLs instead of ones in the site's directory >> (no >> proper mirroring in the old links). >> >> On 12 November 2017 at 19:25, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I don't recall why - it was a while back :) >>> >>> Yes, I think 2.1.0-rc1 would make sense, once we fix the /bin directory >>> issue. >>> >>> On 11/12/17, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > On 12 November 2017 at 13:53, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> That's right -forgot we rev'd to 2.1 internally (info.plist, release >>> >> notes, couple other places). >>> >> >>> > >>> > Any particular reason? >>> > >>> > >>> >> Would it be easiest to release the new version as 2.1.0.0 instead of >>> >> 2.0.0-rc1? Otherwise I could downgrade 2.1 refs, we never had an >>> >> official release with that rev. >>> >> >>> > >>> > I could re-roll as 2.1.0-rc1 (or rc2?). I chose 2.0.0 since there's no >>> tags >>> > or releases for any 2.x release at all, so it seemed like a logical >>> > starting point. >>> > >>> > And thanks for testing! We should be able to clean up for a proper 2.x >>> > release. :) >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> >
