RESULT: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2014-01-01 Thread Benedikt Ritter
This vote has passed, with +1 votes from Gary Gregory Henri Yandell Oliver Heger Jörg Schaible Phil Steitz Benedikt Ritter and no other votes. All votes are binding. The following non blocking issues were detected during this vote: LANG-937: Fix missing Hamcrest dependency in Ant Build [1] L

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-31 Thread Benedikt Ritter
My own +1 FTR. Benedikt P.S.: Since I'll be celebrating new year's eve tonight, I'll count votes tomorrow :-) 2013/12/28 Benedikt Ritter > Hi all, > > I've fixed the issues, that were identified in RC1: > > - Release notes now make explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 > - Website now

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Jörg Schaible
(GMT-05:00) > To: dev@commons.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2 > > Hi, > > my compiler zoo builds fine from source, except minor nits with Java 8: > > = %< == > Failed tests: > FastDa

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Phil Steitz
+1 Checked artifact contents and build on OSX jdk 1.7. Also checked sigs and hashes. Key is available in KEYs and sigs are good. Nice work! Phil On 12/28/13, 9:57 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi all, > > I've fixed the issues, that were identified in RC1: > > - Release notes now make explic

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Gary Gregory
Good find with regard to Java 8. Do you feel like fixing trunk? Gary Original message From: Jörg Schaible Date:12/30/2013 14:06 (GMT-05:00) To: dev@commons.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2 Hi, my compiler zoo builds fine from source

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Benedikt Ritter
Hello Jörg, 2013/12/30 Jörg Schaible > Hi, > > my compiler zoo builds fine from source, except minor nits with Java 8: > > = %< == > Failed tests: > FastDateParserTest.testParseZone:119 expected: 2003> but was: > FastDateFormat_ParserTest>FastDate

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Benedikt Ritter
Hi Oliver, 2013/12/30 Oliver Heger > Maven build works fine on Windows 7 with Java 1.6 and 1.7. Artifacts and > site look good. > > The only problem I found was that I could not successfully run the ant > build. ant test failed with compilation errors due to missing > dependencies to hamcrest -

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi, my compiler zoo builds fine from source, except minor nits with Java 8: = %< == Failed tests: FastDateParserTest.testParseZone:119 expected: but was: FastDateFormat_ParserTest>FastDateParserTest.testParseZone:119 expected: but was: Tests in e

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-30 Thread Oliver Heger
Maven build works fine on Windows 7 with Java 1.6 and 1.7. Artifacts and site look good. The only problem I found was that I could not successfully run the ant build. ant test failed with compilation errors due to missing dependencies to hamcrest - I guess the jar has to be added explicitly to the

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-29 Thread Henri Yandell
+1. On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi all, > > I've fixed the issues, that were identified in RC1: > > - Release notes now make explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 > - Website now makes explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 > - MANIFEST now contains "b

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-28 Thread Gary Gregory
I've fixed some nits in SVN but none should be blockers. Gary On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > +1 > > Looks good (aside from my usual misgivings about breaking BC without a > package change). > > Gary > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> Hi a

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-28 Thread Gary Gregory
+1 Looks good (aside from my usual misgivings about breaking BC without a package change). Gary On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi all, > > I've fixed the issues, that were identified in RC1: > > - Release notes now make explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 >

[VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.2 based on RC2

2013-12-28 Thread Benedikt Ritter
Hi all, I've fixed the issues, that were identified in RC1: - Release notes now make explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 - Website now makes explicit that 3.2 at least requires Java 6.0 - MANIFEST now contains "britter" as value for the Build-By header - Version 3.2 is now listed on the