On 2 June 2011 22:32, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>
>>> If you use the Maven2 build then it should all build as expected.
>>
>> So it seems. I think I'll remove the release target from the ant build (s
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>
>> If you use the Maven2 build then it should all build as expected.
>
> So it seems. I think I'll remove the release target from the ant build (so
> no-one else tries it and gets bitten), then see i
On 6/2/11 2:24 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> If you use the Maven2 build then it should all build as expected.
>
> So it seems. I think I'll remove the release target from the ant
> build (so no-one else tries it and gets bitten), then see if I can
> figure o
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Niall Pemberton wrote:
If you use the Maven2 build then it should all build as expected.
So it seems. I think I'll remove the release target from the ant build (so
no-one else tries it and gets bitten), then see if I can figure out how to
use the maven release plugin!
Ni
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Oliver Heger wrote:
>>
>> About the distribution files: Shouldn't the naming be
>> commons-validator-1.4.0-beta1 rather than validator-1.4.0-beta1? Also the
>> manifest of the jar in the binary distribution does not contain al
On 6/2/11 12:04 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Am 02.06.2011 19:36, schrieb Nick Burch:
>> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Oliver Heger wrote:
>>> About the distribution files: Shouldn't the naming be
>>> commons-validator-1.4.0-beta1 rather than validator-1.4.0-beta1?
>>> Also
>>> the manifest of the jar in the bi
Am 02.06.2011 19:36, schrieb Nick Burch:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Oliver Heger wrote:
About the distribution files: Shouldn't the naming be
commons-validator-1.4.0-beta1 rather than validator-1.4.0-beta1? Also
the manifest of the jar in the binary distribution does not contain
all properties typical
On 2 June 2011 18:24, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Nick Burch wrote:
>
>> Hi All
>>
>> Following last week's discussions, I've rolled a RC for Commons Validator
>> 1.4 beta 1. The idea of this release is to get some wider testing of the
>> codebase, owing to the 4.5 year gap since 1.3.1, before we hopef
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Oliver Heger wrote:
About the distribution files: Shouldn't the naming be
commons-validator-1.4.0-beta1 rather than validator-1.4.0-beta1? Also
the manifest of the jar in the binary distribution does not contain all
properties typical for commons components. When I build the
Nick Burch wrote:
> Hi All
>
> Following last week's discussions, I've rolled a RC for Commons Validator
> 1.4 beta 1. The idea of this release is to get some wider testing of the
> codebase, owing to the 4.5 year gap since 1.3.1, before we hopefully
> release 1.4 in a few weeks time.
>
> (We be
Hi,
I don't know the code base either so will only give some technical
comments related to the artifacts:
Maven and ant builds work fine with Java 1.5 and 1.6 on Windows 7.
About the distribution files: Shouldn't the naming be
commons-validator-1.4.0-beta1 rather than validator-1.4.0-beta1?
Hi Nick,
I do not know enough about this code base to vote on it, but I noticed the
following building with Maven:
[warn] [XHTML Sink] Modified invalid anchor name: 'Changes Report' to
'Changes_Report'
[warn] [XHTML Sink] Modified invalid anchor name: 'Release History' to
'Release_History'
[INFO
Hi All
Following last week's discussions, I've rolled a RC for Commons Validator
1.4 beta 1. The idea of this release is to get some wider testing of the
codebase, owing to the 4.5 year gap since 1.3.1, before we hopefully
release 1.4 in a few weeks time.
(We believe the code is stable and r
13 matches
Mail list logo
