Cancel the right thread this time.
Mark
On 04/11/2013 12:36, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I dont think it is a critical thing for OSGi for two reasons:
>>
>> a) typically dependencies are no longer on the bundle name but on packages
>
> Yes, but names follow
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I dont think it is a critical thing for OSGi for two reasons:
>
> a) typically dependencies are no longer on the bundle name but on packages
Yes, but names follow conventions and in other Apache Commons components we
use the real package name for the bundle
02:04 schrieb Gary Gregory :
>
>
>
> Original message
> From: Bernd Eckenfels
> Date:11/03/2013 19:16 (GMT-05:00)
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC3 as 2.0
>
> Hello,
>
> I dont th
Original message
From: Bernd Eckenfels
Date:11/03/2013 19:16 (GMT-05:00)
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC3 as 2.0
Hello,
I dont think it is a critical thing for OSGi for two reasons:
a) typically dependencies are no
Hello,
I dont think it is a critical thing for OSGi for two reasons:
a) typically dependencies are no longer on the bundle name but on packages
b) there is no need to change the coordinates at all, as the major version
differs
Greetings
Bernd
Am 04.11.2013, 00:43 Uhr, schrieb Phil Steitz :
-0
I am really sorry that I did not catch this in the first review, but
I am afraid we will be headed for a reprise of LANG-749 if we
release this. The jar manifest has
Bundle-SymbolicName: org.apache.commons.pool
IIUC what was stated in LANG-749, this should be pool2. This is
picked up from co
A number of minor issues were noted in RC2 that have been fixed in this
RC3. They include:
- Use https links to Jira
- Correct versions on download page
- Fix final Findbugs warning
- Better code coverage of unit tests
- Make JRE requirement explicit
- Add a missing AL2 header
- Add some missing Ja
