[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Project commons-configuration-test (in module apache-commons) failed

2008-09-18 Thread Gump
To whom it may engage... This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html, and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project commons-configuration-test has an issue affecting its community integration. Thi

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread Rory Winston
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/net/tags/NET_2_0 James Carman wrote: What tag was this built from in SVN? On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The RC for n

Re: svn commit: r696369 - /commons/sandbox/flatfile/trunk/pom.xml

2008-09-18 Thread Matt Benson
As you like... see forthcoming commit. -Matt --- sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 17/09/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Author: mbenson > > Date: Wed Sep 17 09:56:17 2008 > > New Revision: 696369 > > > > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=696369&view=rev > >

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread James Carman
I didn't like the examples stuff being in the "examples" package, but I don't guess that's really a violation or anything. I'd rather see it in o.a.c.net.examples. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:04 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, the binary jar contains an examples/ directory, but it cont

Re: svn commit: r696369 - /commons/sandbox/flatfile/trunk/pom.xml

2008-09-18 Thread sebb
On 17/09/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Author: mbenson > Date: Wed Sep 17 09:56:17 2008 > New Revision: 696369 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=696369&view=rev > Log: > no sense in targeting 1.5 for a component whose whole purpose is integrating > with old stuf

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread sebb
Also, the binary jar contains an examples/ directory, but it contains only the class files. Surely it should contain the source files instead? On 18/09/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The jar files in commons-net-2.0.0-bin.tar are rather inconsistent as > regards LICENSE and NOTICE files

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread sebb
The jar files in commons-net-2.0.0-bin.tar are rather inconsistent as regards LICENSE and NOTICE files commons-net-2.0.0.jar has both in META-INF directory commons-net-2.0.0-tests.jar does not have either commons-net-ftp-2.0.0.jar has both in top-level directory (and it has a META-INF dir) The na

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread James Carman
What tag was this built from in SVN? On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The RC for net-2.0 is available for review at: >> >> http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-2.0 >

Re: [net] 2.0 Release Ready For Review

2008-09-18 Thread Niklas Gustavsson
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The RC for net-2.0 is available for review at: > > http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-2.0 > > Changes are here: > > http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-2.0/site/changes-report.html#a2.0 > > Can someone