+1
On 20 February 2015 at 00:28, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Another try, hopefully right this time (I speak about JCS in a JUG
> next thursday so would be awesome to have a release ;))
>
> - here is the maven repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-108
So with 3 +1s bindings and 2 +1s non-bindings and no other vote this
vote passes.
I'll publish the artifacts and ask some help for the website since I
never did it yet.
Thank you all for the votes and your patience!
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wor
On 19.02.15 14:28, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi
>
> Another try, hopefully right this time (I speak about JCS in a JUG
> next thursday so would be awesome to have a release ;))
>
> - here is the maven repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1083/
> - assembli
Build succeeds on OSX
java version "1.7.0_71"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_71-b14)
Failed on 1.8 due to javadoc whining
Contents look OK, sigs and hashes are good.
Two nits:
* Release notes should be included with source and binary release
tarballs
* BUILDING.txt has a typo - s/i
Build was successful (in half an hour) on Windows 8.1 with JDK 1.6.
Artifacts and site look good.
Nits:
- The sources artifacts in the binary distribution contain spurious
directories.
- IMHO a 2.0 release should have a file with release notes included
describing the possibly breaking changes to t
done
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-02-19 22:27 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> Oops you are right, forgot I changed of key with my hard drive :s. My
> key can be found in http://svn.apache.org/repos
Oops you are right, forgot I changed of key with my hard drive :s. My
key can be found in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS.
I'll add it in commons tomorrow.
Sorry again
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmann
Hi,
maybe the problem is on my side (it has been a long day), but I am not
able to verify the signature of the distributions:
$ gpg --verify commons-jcs-dist-2.0-beta-1-src.zip.asc
gpg: Signature made 02/19/15 11:51:21 using RSA key ID DDB37997
gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
I
Thank you, Romain!
Builds fine; no errors, no warnings - have not checked for other issues; so
here's my non-binding +1;
I'm hardly waiting for a (beta) release, as I'd like to replace old JSC in an
application of mine...
Johannes
mvn -version
Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8
Hi
Another try, hopefully right this time (I speak about JCS in a JUG
next thursday so would be awesome to have a release ;))
- here is the maven repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1083/
- assemblies can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/re
On 29 January 2015 at 01:11, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> They are not, at least what you noted is not blocking and now clean up for
> futures releases
They are blocking.
And it already is a future release, since this problem was pointed out
in the previous review candidate.
It should have been f
Ok get it, let cancel this vote
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-01-29 2:26 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory :
> The NOTICE file at
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jcs/tags/commons-jcs-2.0-bet
The NOTICE file at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jcs/tags/commons-jcs-2.0-beta-1/NOTICE.txt
looks wrong just by the fact that it points to another non-existent file:
This product includes software developed at Xerox Corporation.
See the LICENSE.xerox file.
There is no LICENSE.
They are not, at least what you noted is not blocking and now clean up for
futures releases
Le 29 janv. 2015 00:45, "sebb" a écrit :
> On 28 January 2015 at 20:46, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> > Build takes ~15mn on my computer but my hard drive is slow (compared
> > to a mac I'm at least twice
On 28 January 2015 at 20:46, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Build takes ~15mn on my computer but my hard drive is slow (compared
> to a mac I'm at least twice slower cause of it).
>
> BTW I'll remove aspectj dir on trunk.
>
> About Java 8: while it is javadoc only I think we don't care - in
> particu
Build takes ~15mn on my computer but my hard drive is slow (compared
to a mac I'm at least twice slower cause of it).
BTW I'll remove aspectj dir on trunk.
About Java 8: while it is javadoc only I think we don't care - in
particular since we can't release building with a java 8 JVM while we
don't
On 28.01.15 20:39, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hello Romain,
>
> I've looked at the RC.
>
> - Signs and hashes are good
> - builds find with maven 3.2.5 and Java 6 and 7, although the build of the
> core takes forever... The build fails with Java 8 (I've run mvn clean
> verify). It looks like it's t
On 26.01.15 12:19, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> if that's the case +1 but anyway it doesnt hurt
>
> @Thomas: before dropping it can you confirm it a last time please?
I don't even know if it actually works with the current code. It was
like this when I got here (TM). I'd suggest to remove the aspe
Hello Romain,
I've looked at the RC.
- Signs and hashes are good
- builds find with maven 3.2.5 and Java 6 and 7, although the build of the
core takes forever... The build fails with Java 8 (I've run mvn clean
verify). It looks like it's trying to create the JavaDocs but that fails
because of doc
@sebb: I read this doc when you mentionned it previously and
intentionnaly kept it cause it makes things clearer for me and it is
not mandatory to remove it, just better. I thought more code was from
xerox - why I wanted to keep it. Anyway this is not a blocker at all
and we have to fix it, just wa
On 26 January 2015 at 17:38, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Sebb, this is nowhere stated in the bylaws. There is just no ground for
> totally blasting a release!
This has come up several times, and the rules are still at:
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> It's superfluous and
Sebb, this is nowhere stated in the bylaws. There is just no ground for totally
blasting a release!
It's superfluous and not 100% perfect but it is NOT wrong. The sources
_currenty_ contain this file, so we have it.
For how long is this now in the codebase? 2 years? even longer?
Be glad that Ro
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:48 AM, sebb wrote:
>
> Strictly speaking that is true, but when an issue is found, the RM
> should take any vetos into account.
>
They are NOT vetoes.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.
but this is not a blocker and actually can even be considered right
since optional doesn't mean shouldn't be mentioned (in particular I
think it is better to mention it even if optional to avoid ambiguities
and keep the origin explicit)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
htt
On 26 January 2015 at 16:47, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> 2015-01-26 17:41 GMT+01:00 sebb :
>> On 26 January 2015 at 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> wrote:
>>> Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle?
>>
>> No, it also affects the binary bundle, and it affects the SVN tag
>> (which is also a dist
2015-01-26 17:48 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 26 January 2015 at 13:45, James Carman wrote:
>> Release votes cannot be vetoed, so it's just a vote against. If you
>
> The problem here is that there does not appear to be a specific commit
> that can be vetoed which can be said to be the cause of the prob
On 26 January 2015 at 13:45, James Carman wrote:
> Release votes cannot be vetoed, so it's just a vote against. If you
The problem here is that there does not appear to be a specific commit
that can be vetoed which can be said to be the cause of the problem.
> have more +1's than -1's and you h
2015-01-26 17:41 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 26 January 2015 at 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle?
>
> No, it also affects the binary bundle, and it affects the SVN tag
> (which is also a distribution, though not a release)
>
Not the bundle since aspectj fil
On 26 January 2015 at 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle?
No, it also affects the binary bundle, and it affects the SVN tag
(which is also a distribution, though not a release)
> Not sure it does need to cancel the vote, this is not a major issue
> IMO
Release votes cannot be vetoed, so it's just a vote against. If you
have more +1's than -1's and you have at least 3 PMC folks saying +1,
then you can release. However, if we do have an opportunity to clean
something up here, we should take it. If we can just remove this file
and move on without
Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle?
Not sure it does need to cancel the vote, this is not a major issue
IMO and can be fixed for next one
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-01-26 12:39 GMT+01:0
On 26 January 2015 at 11:30, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> @sebb: not sure I get it right, it references LICENSE.txt correctly for me
Not sure what you mean by "it" above.
As I already wrote:
The NOTICE file should not reference LICENSE.txt
Nor should it reference LICENSE.xerox, because the Xerox
@sebb: not sure I get it right, it references LICENSE.txt correctly for me
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-01-26 12:27 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 26 January 2015 at 11:19, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> if t
On 26 January 2015 at 11:19, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> if that's the case +1 but anyway it doesnt hurt
But it does have some consequences, because of the license issues.
> @Thomas: before dropping it can you confirm it a last time please?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.to
if that's the case +1 but anyway it doesnt hurt
@Thomas: before dropping it can you confirm it a last time please?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-01-26 12:18 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> Why not just drop it e
Why not just drop it entirely?
If that is the only Xerox-licensed file, it is not essential to the
operation of JCS, so why keep it?
On 25 January 2015 at 21:44, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> this is not packaged AFAIK, just here as a sample I guess.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmanni
Hi Mark,
this is not packaged AFAIK, just here as a sample I guess.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2015-01-25 22:35 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg :
> is that all?
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/prop
is that all?
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jcs/trunk/commons-jcs-core/src/aspect/org/apache/commons/Trace.aj
Wouldn't it be actually quite easy to replace this?
LieGrue,
strub
> On Sunday, 25 January 2015, 19:30, Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> > On 25.01.15 17:00, Romain Manni-
On 25.01.15 17:00, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> It does AFAIK - was not here and just propagated existing legal text - and
> that is why it is referenced in core and not all artifacts.
> Le 25 janv. 2015 16:55, "sebb" a écrit :
The XEROX license relates to the file
/commons-jcs-core/src/aspect/or
gt; >>>>
> >> >>>> mvn site site:stage
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> should generate a complete site with all submodules in
> target/staging/
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Dont forget to enable all profiles.
&g
;
>> >>>> Dont forget to enable all profiles.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Fails with
>> >>>
>> >>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>> >>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-site-plugin:3.4:stage (default-cli) o
rofiles.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Fails with
> >>>
> >>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> >>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-site-plugin:3.4:stage (default-cli) on
> >>> project commons-jcs: Missing site information in the distribution
>
(org.apache.commons:commons-jcs:2.0-beta-1) -> [Help 1]
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> gruss
>>>> Bernd
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>>>>
>>>> - Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
>>&
in the distribution
>> management of the project Apache Commons JCS
>> (org.apache.commons:commons-jcs:2.0-beta-1) -> [Help 1]
>>
>>
>> >
>> > gruss
>> > Bernd
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>> >
&g
tribution
> management of the project Apache Commons JCS
> (org.apache.commons:commons-jcs:2.0-beta-1) -> [Help 1]
>
>
> >
> > gruss
> > Bernd
> >
> > --
> > http://bernd.eckenfels.net
> >
> > ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -----
>
Bernd
>
> --
> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>
> - Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
> Von: "Romain Manni-Bucau"
> Gesendet: 05.01.2015 20:03
> An: "Commons Developers List"
> Betreff: Re: [VOTE][JCS] release [jcs] 2.0-beta-1 (take 3)
>
> Hi
>
> What I
Bucau"
Gesendet: 05.01.2015 20:03
An: "Commons Developers List"
Betreff: Re: [VOTE][JCS] release [jcs] 2.0-beta-1 (take 3)
Hi
What I did was mainly mvn site for all module then copy all generate
site folder in a folder named as the module. For instance
http://people.apache.org/~rmannib
Hi
What I did was mainly mvn site for all module then copy all generate
site folder in a folder named as the module. For instance
http://people.apache.org/~rmannibucau/commons-jcs-2.0-beta-1/commons-jcs-jcache/index.html
was in commons-jcs-jcache/target/site/
Not sure it is the right procedure bu
Hello Romain,
what do I have to do to build the module web sites? After mvn site I have a
link "Project Modules" in the navigation, but the links to the module sites
don't work. Can you help?
Benedikt
2015-01-04 22:35 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> Hi
>
> Another try with license/notice files
Hi
Another try with license/notice files
- here is the maven repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1074/
- assemblies can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1074/org/apache/commons/commons-jcs-dist/2.0-beta-1/
- ta
cancelled cause of missing license/notice in sources
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-12-10 11:36 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> ok,
>
> yeah sources jars are the ones without these files
>
>
> Romain
ok,
yeah sources jars are the ones without these files
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-12-10 11:30 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 10 December 2014 at 09:36, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
>> 2014-12-10 10:07 GM
On 10 December 2014 at 09:36, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> 2014-12-10 10:07 GMT+01:00 sebb :
>> There are some discrepancies between the source artifact and the SVN tag.
>>
>> The source artifact contains derby.log under commons-jcs-jcache-openjpa
>>
>> The source bundles should not contain the doa
2014-12-10 10:07 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> There are some discrepancies between the source artifact and the SVN tag.
>
> The source artifact contains derby.log under commons-jcs-jcache-openjpa
>
> The source bundles should not contain the doap file
>
> Those problems can be addressed by fixing the appropr
There are some discrepancies between the source artifact and the SVN tag.
The source artifact contains derby.log under commons-jcs-jcache-openjpa
The source bundles should not contain the doap file
Those problems can be addressed by fixing the appropriate assembly descriptors.
Note that the pres
yes there are 2-3 tests which can fail "easily" (on my machine I
shouldn't do anything else otherwise it fails). Reruing them is enough
to have a green build in general.
About notice file I didnt do anything special.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wor
Hi,
the jars and javadoc-jars now indeed contain LICENSE and NOTICE files
(the source artifacts still do not); however, I have the impression that
these are not the correct ones: they are missing the .txt extension, and
at least the content of NOTICE is different from the NOTICE.txt shipped
at the
mvn clean source:jar install -Prelease -Djcache.tck release:prepare then
perform
Le 5 déc. 2014 19:49, "sebb" a écrit :
> That's not needed in single module projects.
>
> Looks like CP needs some TLC for multi-module projects such as JCS.
>
> BTW, what command-line did you use to create the RC?
>
That's not needed in single module projects.
Looks like CP needs some TLC for multi-module projects such as JCS.
BTW, what command-line did you use to create the RC?
On 5 December 2014 at 11:23, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> no, issue was commons-parent skips the plugin doing it, just needed to
>
no, issue was commons-parent skips the plugin doing it, just needed to
activate it back in [jcs]
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-12-05 12:22 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 5 December 2014 at 07:58, Romain Manni
On 5 December 2014 at 07:58, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> found the cause for license/notice, comons-parent pom skips it :( (seriously?)
Apache parent POM automatically adds "LICENSE" and
"NOTICE" files
to jars - duplicating the "LICENSE.txt" and "NOTICE.txt"
Hi
Another try with license/notice files
- here is the maven repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1065
- assemblies can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1065/org/apache/commons/commons-jcs-dist/2.0-beta-1/
- tag
I'll add license/notice files and rerun the release
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-12-05 8:58 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> found the cause for license/notice, comons-parent pom skips it :( (seriou
found the cause for license/notice, comons-parent pom skips it :( (seriously?)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-12-04 14:41 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> Hi
>
> 2014-12-03 22:29 GMT+01:00 Oliver Hege
Hi
2014-12-03 22:29 GMT+01:00 Oliver Heger :
> Hi Romain,
>
> I tried to build the source distribution on Windows 8.1 with Java 1.6
> and 1.7, but a test seems to hang - ironically the test
> org.apache.commons.jcs.auxiliary.disk.indexed.IndexedDiskCacheConcurrentNoDeadLockUnitTest.
> Or does it r
Hi Romain,
I tried to build the source distribution on Windows 8.1 with Java 1.6
and 1.7, but a test seems to hang - ironically the test
org.apache.commons.jcs.auxiliary.disk.indexed.IndexedDiskCacheConcurrentNoDeadLockUnitTest.
Or does it really take that long (I lost patience after ~ 10 minutes,
Xmas is coming ;). Thanks for the effort Gary.
Le 3 déc. 2014 05:08, "Gary Gregory" a écrit :
> Wow, no votes? :-( I am guilty of not having taken the time to look at this
> beyond trying to build it...
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> >
Wow, no votes? :-( I am guilty of not having taken the time to look at this
beyond trying to build it...
Gary
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Finally took some time to try to finally get a beta for JCS 2.
>
> - here is the maven repo:
> https://repository.apa
Hi
Finally took some time to try to finally get a beta for JCS 2.
- here is the maven repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1064/
- assemblies can be found here
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1064/org/apache/commons/commons-
69 matches
Mail list logo
