Excellent point on the release notes, Oliver. Consider this vote cancelled.
Matt
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
> Build works fine for me with the following configuration:
> $ mvn --version
> Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da;
> 2013-02-19 14:51
Build works fine for me with the following configuration:
$ mvn --version
Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da;
2013-02-19 14:51:28+0100)
Maven home: c:\data\dev\tools\apache-maven-3.0.5
Java version: 1.7.0_55, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Java home: c:\Program Files\Java\jdk
ssage From: Matt Benson <
> gudnabr...@gmail.com> Date:06/05/2014 14:27 (GMT-05:00)
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 based on
> RC1
> Hi Phil,
> Unfortunately [weaver] is beset by
> http://jira.codehaus.org/br
Then we need to state in a BUILDING.txt what versions of what are known good
build setups.
Gary
Original message From: Matt Benson
Date:06/05/2014 14:27 (GMT-05:00)
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 based on RC1
Hi Phil
Hi Phil,
Unfortunately [weaver] is beset by
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-5601 . I *could* modify it such that
v1.0 of commons-weaver-build-tools is used for the checkstyle/PMD/findbugs
settings, but it strikes me that this is counterintuitive. It might be
feasible to extract this to a prop
I can't build this without installing a new old version of Maven
(seems to require [3.0.0,3.2.0)). Is there a workaround to get the
build to work on either 3.2 or 2.2 (the two I already have
installed)? Or is there a way to build the code using Ant? I don't
care about the site issues, but I need
Yeah, well, multi-module sites is not something easy to get right in Maven
IMO. This site in an example because it seems to have three levels and it
is hard to navigate.
When I look at the page:
https://people.apache.org/~mbenson/commons-weaver-1.1-rc1/index.html
how do I find the modules? I hav
During the vote for the 1.0 release, one of your complaints that led to
your -1 was that "finding the modules requires drilling down on the site."
I took this to mean you did not find the modules link helpful and therefore
removed it in favor of direct and explicit text in the project overview.
Per
How do I find these modules from the main site? I expect to see them in the
left hand side menu.
Gary
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> As this is a multimodule component, report content tends to be more correct
> when relegated to the module level. Please see:
>
>
> http://
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > Original message From: Emmanuel Bourg <
> > ebo...@apache.org> Date:06/04/2014 18:49 (GMT-05:00)
> > To: Commons Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 based on
> > RC1
>
ers.
>
> Gary
>
> Original message From: Emmanuel Bourg <
> ebo...@apache.org> Date:06/04/2014 18:49 (GMT-05:00)
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 based on
> RC1
> Le 04/06/2014 23:58, sebb a écrit :
>
> >
I agree with Sebb, age is irrelevant. BY still matters.
Gary
Original message From: Emmanuel Bourg
Date:06/04/2014 18:49 (GMT-05:00)
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 based on RC1
Le 04/06/2014 23:58, sebb a écrit
+1 that's mainly an internal lib (more than public one ATM) so no issue
with API *now*
Le 4 juin 2014 23:49, "Emmanuel Bourg" a écrit :
> Le 04/06/2014 23:58, sebb a écrit :
>
> > Huh?
> > Why should it matter how old the component is?
> > Breaking the API can still cause serious problems.
>
> If
Le 04/06/2014 23:58, sebb a écrit :
> Huh?
> Why should it matter how old the component is?
> Breaking the API can still cause serious problems.
If a young component isn't yet widely used a binary incompatible change
is less likely to create a problem. It's not like [lang] or [io] which
have been
On 4 June 2014 22:12, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 04/06/2014 23:02, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>> aalmost -1 because there is no Clirr report on the site so I cannot
>> tell if 1.1 breaks or maintains BC.
>
> Commons Weaver 1.0 has been released 3 months ago, I don't think it
> would be fair to blo
As this is a multimodule component, report content tends to be more correct
when relegated to the module level. Please see:
http://people.apache.org/~mbenson/commons-weaver-1.1-rc1/commons-weaver-processor/project-reports.html
http://people.apache.org/~mbenson/commons-weaver-1.1-rc1/commons-weaver
Le 04/06/2014 23:02, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> aalmost -1 because there is no Clirr report on the site so I cannot
> tell if 1.1 breaks or maintains BC.
Commons Weaver 1.0 has been released 3 months ago, I don't think it
would be fair to block the release for a breaking change with such a
young
I kinda expect FindBugs, PMD and Checkstyle reports...
Gary
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> aalmost -1 because there is no Clirr report on the site so I cannot
> tell if 1.1 breaks or maintains BC.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>
>
aalmost -1 because there is no Clirr report on the site so I cannot
tell if 1.1 breaks or maintains BC.
Gary
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> I would like to release the [weaver] component.
>
> Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 RC1 is available for review at:
> https://dist.a
I would like to release the [weaver] component.
Apache Commons Weaver 1.1 RC1 is available for review at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/weaver/ (r5487, md5s and
sha1s in 5488).
Maven artifacts are at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1033/
20 matches
Mail list logo
