This vote is canceled because of a problem with the build under Java 1.6.
I will create another RC soon.
Thanks for the reviews.
Oliver
Am 24.07.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Oliver Heger:
> Hi all,
>
> there have been a number of bug fixes and also some new features for
> [configuration] since version
Hi Benedikt,
Am 28.07.2016 um 08:30 schrieb Benedikt Ritter:
> Hello Oliver,
>
> Oliver Heger schrieb am Mi., 27. Juli 2016
> um 21:30 Uhr:
>
>> Thanks for the reviews so far.
>>
>> I tested with the Java 1.6 compatibility profile, and here a mvn clean
>> install is successful (using Maven 3.3.
Dennis Kieselhorst schrieb am Do., 28. Juli 2016 um
08:56 Uhr:
>
> > Any proposals which version of the checkstyle plugin would be
> > compatible? Or why does the checkstyle plugin becomes active for a mvn
> > clean install at all?
> >
> Sorry, I simply changed it to latest version without notici
> Any proposals which version of the checkstyle plugin would be
> compatible? Or why does the checkstyle plugin becomes active for a mvn
> clean install at all?
>
Sorry, I simply changed it to latest version without noticing that Java
7 is now required.
According to
https://maven.apache.org/plugi
Hello Oliver,
Oliver Heger schrieb am Mi., 27. Juli 2016
um 21:30 Uhr:
> Thanks for the reviews so far.
>
> I tested with the Java 1.6 compatibility profile, and here a mvn clean
> install is successful (using Maven 3.3.9).
>
do you use the profile defined in parent pom? Can you paste the exact
I ran 'mvn clean site'.
Gary
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Thanks for the reviews so far.
>
> I tested with the Java 1.6 compatibility profile, and here a mvn clean
> install is successful (using Maven 3.3.9).
>
> Any proposals which version of the checkstyle plugin wo
Thanks for the reviews so far.
I tested with the Java 1.6 compatibility profile, and here a mvn clean
install is successful (using Maven 3.3.9).
Any proposals which version of the checkstyle plugin would be
compatible? Or why does the checkstyle plugin becomes active for a mvn
clean install at al
Bummer! I have to change my vote from +1 to -1. I used Java 8 to test,
which I should not have. With Java 6, it fails indeed [1].
I used:
Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da; 2013-02-19
05:51:28-0800)
Maven home: E:\Java\apache-maven-3.0.5
Java version: 1.6.0_45, vendor:
Hello Oliver,
Minor nit: Release notes talk about "Commons Configuration Package". I
think this should be Apache Commons Configuration.
Signs and hashes look good.
Website looks good.
The build fails with:
$ mvn -v
Apache Maven 3.2.5 (12a6b3acb947671f09b81f49094c53f426d8cea1;
2014-12-14T18:29:2
+1
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:31 AM, Dennis Kieselhorst wrote:
> +1
>
> Am 24.07.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Oliver Heger:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > there have been a number of bug fixes and also some new features for
> > [configuration] since version 2.0 has been released. Those should be
> > made available
+1
Am 24.07.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Oliver Heger:
> Hi all,
>
> there have been a number of bug fixes and also some new features for
> [configuration] since version 2.0 has been released. Those should be
> made available to the public. This is the vote for the 2.1 release.
>
> Configuration 2.1 RC1
+1
Based on the src zip, the ASC, MD5, and SHA1 are OK.
RAT and Clirr checks OK.
Tests pass, site builds, reports look good.
Files in tag matches src zip except for PROPOSAL.html.
Tested with:
Apache Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT (90f26c279af9738735be8f84f60dcf21b6244e24;
2016-07-22T08:23:04-07:00)
Ma
Hi all,
there have been a number of bug fixes and also some new features for
[configuration] since version 2.0 has been released. Those should be
made available to the public. This is the vote for the 2.1 release.
Configuration 2.1 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/rep
13 matches
Mail list logo
