Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-22, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig >> wrote: at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential backwards incompa

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig > wrote: > > >> at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential > >> backwards incompatible change as well. > > > OK, sounds

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential >> backwards incompatible change as well. > OK, sounds good. I'll look forward to the next RC. See http://svn.apache.org/r1534

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi, > > while writing additional tests I found SevenZOutFile wasn't handling > directories correctly - or rather its handling of anything empty isn't > correct. > > I'll add new tests, fix the implementation and re-roll another RC - > at t

[CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi, while writing additional tests I found SevenZOutFile wasn't handling directories correctly - or rather its handling of anything empty isn't correct. I'll add new tests, fix the implementation and re-roll another RC - at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential back

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2013-10-16, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > Now that we have a new cleaned up RC, I want to make sure that we > > understand that, strictly speaking and while unlikely in practice, > > 1.6-RC2 breaks binary compatibility with 1.5 (see Clirr).

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-16, Gary Gregory wrote: > Now that we have a new cleaned up RC, I want to make sure that we > understand that, strictly speaking and while unlikely in practice, > 1.6-RC2 breaks binary compatibility with 1.5 (see Clirr). I think we > started discussing this and after some hand-waving so

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-15, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Please review the release candidate and vote. +1 [making my own vote explicit] Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hello Stefan, everything builds fine with: Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 17:22:22+0200) Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apache-maven-3.1.1 Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_40.jdk

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 Phil On 10/15/13 11:26 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi all, > > I've addressed most of the issues brought up during the RC1 vote. I'll > have limited net time the next three days, but hopefully I won't be > needed. > > Stefan > > Compress 1.6 RC2 is available for review here: > https://di

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 If a new RC is needed I would suggest looking at SevenZOutputFile, there are several chunks of untested code: http://people.apache.org/~bodewig/cc-1.6/site/cobertura/org.apache.commons.compress.archivers.sevenz.SevenZOutputFile.html Emmanuel Bourg Le 15/10/2013 20:26, Stefan Bodewig a écrit

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 for the release from me

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 16 Oct 2013, at 16:28, Gary Gregory wrote: On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two buffer fields it doesn't look so bad (just additions). I believe these two fields are acceptable although I understand

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > [X] +1 Release these artifacts > > > On 16 Oct 2013, at 15:20, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> Thank you Stefan for the new RC. >> > > +1 > > Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two > buffer fields it does

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi, [X] +1 Release these artifacts On 16 Oct 2013, at 15:20, Gary Gregory wrote: Thank you Stefan for the new RC. +1 Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two buffer fields it doesn't look so bad (just additions). I believe these two fields are acceptable althoug

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi All: Thank you Stefan for the new RC. Now that we have a new cleaned up RC, I want to make sure that we understand that, strictly speaking and while unlikely in practice, 1.6-RC2 breaks binary compatibility with 1.5 (see Clirr). I think we started discussing this and after some hand-waving som

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good +1 On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi all, > > I've addressed most of the issues brought up during the RC1 vote. I'll > have limited net time the next three days, but hopefully I won't be > needed. > > Stefan > > Compress 1.

[VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi all, I've addressed most of the issues brought up during the RC1 vote. I'll have limited net time the next three days, but hopefully I won't be needed. Stefan Compress 1.6 RC2 is available for review here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/ (svn revision 3272)