Re: [All] CP definitions

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 09:26:07 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:05 AM Gilles wrote: On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 08:52:37 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >> On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Gilles >> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:38 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 20, 2018,

Re: [All] CP definitions

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:05 AM Gilles > wrote: > >> On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 08:52:37 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Gilles wrote: On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:05 AM Gilles wrote: > On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 08:52:37 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: > >> On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Gilles > >> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:38 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: > On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter > wrote: >

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 08:52:37 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Gilles wrote: On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:38 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello, Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this comm

Re: [All] CP definitions

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Gilles wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:38 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this >>> commit [2] breaking multiple compo

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:53:38 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello, Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this commit [2] breaking multiple component builds. As Stefan points out the initial change does not make sense

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hello, > > Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this > commit [2] breaking multiple component builds. As Stefan points out the > initial change does not make sense, since the componentId is always just > the

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:10:50 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello, Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this commit [2] breaking multiple component builds. As Stefan points out the initial change does not make sense, since the componentId is always just the name wit

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

Hello, Reverting this change was discussed here [1]. It was a result of this commit [2] breaking multiple component builds. As Stefan points out the initial change does not make sense, since the componentId is always just the name without "commons-" (e.g. math4). But the folders for all the websit

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 8:30 AM Rob Tompkins wrote: > I think the plan moving forward here is that we should do the following: > > math > math4 > > And change [parent] back to > > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/${commons.componentid} > > > Yeah?

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 10:28:50 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: I think the plan moving forward here is that we should do the following: math math4 See my other post for an alternative. And change [parent] back to https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/${co

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

I think the plan moving forward here is that we should do the following: math math4 And change [parent] back to https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/${commons.componentid} Yeah? -Rob > On Sep 19, 2018, at 9:36 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote: > > > >> On Se

Re: [All] CP definitions

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:36:25 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: On Sep 19, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Gilles wrote: On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:45:13 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: The difference is to account for artifact ids that contain a version like commons-lang3. The component id is then just commons-lang. You

Re: [All] CP definitions

Hi Rob. On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:08:51 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: My impression was that we had this conversation, and we decided that we wanted this the other way around and to fix the components respectively due to the semantics of the issue at hand based on what Gary said below. It is not cle

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Gilles wrote: > >> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:45:13 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: >> The difference is to account for artifact ids that contain a version like >> commons-lang3. The component id is then just commons-lang. You must not >> have versions in names for certai

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 06:45:13 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: The difference is to account for artifact ids that contain a version like commons-lang3. The component id is then just commons-lang. You must not have versions in names for certain names like in the download page. This change will probabl

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

My impression was that we had this conversation, and we decided that we wanted this the other way around and to fix the components respectively due to the semantics of the issue at hand based on what Gary said below. -Rob > On Sep 19, 2018, at 8:45 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > The difference

Re: [All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

The difference is to account for artifact ids that contain a version like commons-lang3. The component id is then just commons-lang. You must not have versions in names for certain names like in the download page. This change will probably break builds like pool, dbcp, lang, and so on. Gary On We

[All] CP definitions (Was: svn commit: r1841296 [...])

Hi. Are we sure that the fix/revert below to work as intended for *all* components? Common usage should be enforced (e.g. to allow anyone to help releasing any component), and ancient inconsistencies fixed. With a concrete example of a component that has had major version changes (and top-level