Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-02-27, Gary Gregory wrote: > What is the conclusion of this vote thread? Did I miss a CANCEL or RESULT > email while I was gone? http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201502.mbox/%3C87oapdqxa0.fsf%40v35516.1blu.de%3E Stefan

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

What is the conclusion of this vote thread? Did I miss a CANCEL or RESULT email while I was gone? Gary On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 1:07 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2015-01-30, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > > What will happen if a client has overwritten a method from > > InternalLZWInputStream? > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-01-30, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > What will happen if a client has overwritten a method from > InternalLZWInputStream? My example already did, close is implemented in InternalLZWInputStream. I just extended the example to also override setClearCode and it still works. Stefan

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 30 January 2015 at 17:34, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 30/01/2015 17:48, Gary Gregory a écrit : > >> Well, we cannot break BC in a minor release for a public class. Are we >> sure BC breaks? >> >> If we want to make this internal package public, it needs to be copied to >> the new location, not

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Le 30/01/2015 17:48, Gary Gregory a écrit : > Well, we cannot break BC in a minor release for a public class. Are we > sure BC breaks? > > If we want to make this internal package public, it needs to be copied to > the new location, not moved. Then ZCompressorInputStream would still extend > the

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 30 January 2015 at 16:48, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >> On 2015-01-30, sebb wrote: >> >> > On 30 January 2015 at 08:20, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> >> On 2015-01-28, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> >> >>> - PROPOSAL.txt is not in the src archives. Sh

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Hello Stefan, 2015-01-30 20:41 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig : > On 2015-01-30, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig > wrote: > > >> The superclass of ZCompressorInputStream has changed from one we've > >> removed with the old __internal__ package to a new one in

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-01-30, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> The superclass of ZCompressorInputStream has changed from one we've >> removed with the old __internal__ package to a new one in the now >> supported lzw package. > Well, we cannot break BC in a minor

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2015-01-30, sebb wrote: > > > On 30 January 2015 at 08:20, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >> On 2015-01-28, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > >>> - PROPOSAL.txt is not in the src archives. Should it be? > > >> This is only there for historical reason

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-01-30, sebb wrote: > On 30 January 2015 at 08:20, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2015-01-28, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >>> - PROPOSAL.txt is not in the src archives. Should it be? >> This is only there for historical reasons, I don't even think the other >> components still have a file like t

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 30 January 2015 at 08:20, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2015-01-28, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> - PROPOSAL.txt is not in the src archives. Should it be? > > This is only there for historical reasons, I don't even think the other > components still have a file like this. I've removed it completely

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-01-28, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > - PROPOSAL.txt is not in the src archives. Should it be? This is only there for historical reasons, I don't even think the other components still have a file like this. I've removed it completely. > - there is a typo in the release notes. The first line s

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

2015-01-28 19:30 GMT+01:00 Benedikt Ritter : > Hello Stefan, > > - I've build this RC with Maven 3.2.5 and Java 6, 7, 8 and 9 EA. Java 6, 7 > and 8 work fine (although the site can not be build with Java 8 due to > doclint). Java 9 fails, because it does not support target option 1.5. I just fixed

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Hello Stefan, - I've build this RC with Maven 3.2.5 and Java 6, 7, 8 and 9 EA. Java 6, 7 and 8 work fine (although the site can not be build with Java 8 due to doclint). Java 9 fails, because it does not support target option 1.5. - Signs and hashes look good. - Site looks good Here are a few thi

[CANCEL][VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On 2015-01-27, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 4:54 AM, Kristian Rosenvold < > kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I've run through all of our tests and the release looks good. >> The testcase should fail 1 in 1000 times as is and has been fixed. >> I'm +1 on the release as su

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

2015-01-27 15:24 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory : > I'd prefer a clean RC to give a positive vote. So I'll abstain for now. That seems to be the norm :) K - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional comm

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 4:54 AM, Kristian Rosenvold < kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've run through all of our tests and the release looks good. > > The testcase should fail 1 in 1000 times as is and has been fixed. > > I'm +1 on the release as such (but we'd normally recut or leave this

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

I've run through all of our tests and the release looks good. The testcase should fail 1 in 1000 times as is and has been fixed. I'm +1 on the release as such (but we'd normally recut or leave this decision to the RM). Krisian 2015-01-27 7:35 GMT+01:00 Kristian Rosenvold : > Done in r165498

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Done in r1654980. This whole incident is a confirmation of murphys law; I must've run that test 500 times on my machine without failure =:) K 2015-01-27 0:10 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory : > I see you changed the test but the code could benefit from a comment to > avoid a future regression back to th

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

I see you changed the test but the code could benefit from a comment to avoid a future regression back to this problem. Gary On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > Testcase fixed in r1654901 > > Kristian > > > 2015-01-26 22:37 GMT+01:00 Kristian Rosenvold < > kristian.rose

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Testcase fixed in r1654901 Kristian 2015-01-26 22:37 GMT+01:00 Kristian Rosenvold : > 2015-01-26 22:27 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory : >> Tests: >> >> Running: 'mvn clean site' gave me >> >> Failed tests: >> ZipTestCase.testCopyRawZip64EntryFromFile:361->assertSameFileContents:414 >> arrays first dif

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

2015-01-26 22:27 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory : > Tests: > > Running: 'mvn clean site' gave me > > Failed tests: > ZipTestCase.testCopyRawZip64EntryFromFile:361->assertSameFileContents:414 > arrays first differed at element [10]; expected:<-16> but was:<-15> The problem appears to be that time does no

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

Thank you for preparing this RC Stefan. Using with src zip from binary dist folder: MD5 OK. ASC OK. Tests: Running: 'mvn clean site' gave me Failed tests: ZipTestCase.testCopyRawZip64EntryFromFile:361->assertSameFileContents:414 arrays first differed at element [10]; expected:<-16> but was:<

[VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 Based on RC1

As inidcated last week, here is the first RC for Compress 1.10. Compress 1.10 RC1 is available for review here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/ (svn revision 7828) Maven artifacts are here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1