Joerg Hohwiller wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there,
...and we have a winner!
I am a little late ;)
Could you please change the groupId to "org.apache.commons.logging".
It is an ugly legacy problem that many projects are still ignoring the maven
conventions.
Here ar
Joerg Hohwiller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Could you please change the groupId to "org.apache.commons.logging".
> It is an ugly legacy problem that many projects are still ignoring the maven
> conventions.
>
> Here are the good boys that have already been convinced:
> http://repo1.maven.o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there,
> ...and we have a winner!
I am a little late ;)
Could you please change the groupId to "org.apache.commons.logging".
It is an ugly legacy problem that many projects are still ignoring the maven
conventions.
Here are the good boys that have
...and we have a winner!
The vote has passed with the following votes:
+1 (binding): Torsten Curdt, Oliver Heger, Sebastian Bazley, Jörg
Schaible, Dennis Lundberg
+1 (non-binding at the time of his vote, but binding now): Ben Speakmon
+1 (non-binding): Nicolas de Loof,
I'm proceeding with t
+1
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
This is the fourth attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last go:
- The manifests now has the correct X-Compile-Target-JDK in them
- The manifests no longer mention Jakarta
- [LOGGING-118] Generate source and binary archives.
Release Notes:
h
On 24/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 23/11/2007, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> >>> Yeah, I just noticed that as well. WTF! I am unable to reproduce it
> >>> again, even with an exact copy of the files I built before.
sebb wrote:
On 23/11/2007, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Yeah, I just noticed that as well. WTF! I am unable to reproduce it
again, even with an exact copy of the files I built before.
This is just the source distributions though, so no jars are present in
them
On 23/11/2007, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> > Yeah, I just noticed that as well. WTF! I am unable to reproduce it
> > again, even with an exact copy of the files I built before.
> >
> > This is just the source distributions though, so no jars are present in
> >
I had a look in JIRA for the assembly plugin and found this issue:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASSEMBLY-222
It seems to fit the bill and is fixed in the 2.2-beta-2 release.
Ben Speakmon wrote:
Same thing (the 2.4-1 bit) happened to me when I was doing the email
release. I wasn't able to re
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the fourth attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last go:
> - The manifests now has the correct X-Compile-Target-JDK in them
> - The manifests no longer mention Jakarta
> - [LOGGING-118] Generate source and binary archives.
>
> R
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Yeah, I just noticed that as well. WTF! I am unable to reproduce it
again, even with an exact copy of the files I built before.
This is just the source distributions though, so no jars are present in
them. Would it be OK if I repackage the -src.zip and -src.tar.gz files
Same thing (the 2.4-1 bit) happened to me when I was doing the email
release. I wasn't able to repro it, so I didn't file a bug and wrote
it off to cosmic rays. But obviously there's something strange going
on.
+1 nonbinding on the release, BTW.
On Nov 22, 2007 1:54 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PR
Yeah, I just noticed that as well. WTF! I am unable to reproduce it
again, even with an exact copy of the files I built before.
This is just the source distributions though, so no jars are present in
them. Would it be OK if I repackage the -src.zip and -src.tar.gz files
with the correct path a
Oliver Heger wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Oliver Heger wrote:
+1
Some minor remarks (which are not too problematic IMO):
- The format of the md5 files is a bit unusual. Other components
typically use a format like
f88520ed791673aed6cc4591bc058b55 *commons-logging-1.1.1-bin.zip
I created
Sorry, just noticed one more thing: The source distributions unpack in a
directory "commons-logging-2.4.1-src". This version number is really
future-proof ;-)
Oliver
Oliver Heger wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Oliver Heger wrote:
+1
Some minor remarks (which are not too problematic IMO):
-
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Oliver Heger wrote:
+1
Some minor remarks (which are not too problematic IMO):
- The format of the md5 files is a bit unusual. Other components
typically use a format like
f88520ed791673aed6cc4591bc058b55 *commons-logging-1.1.1-bin.zip
I created them on people.a.o af
Oliver Heger wrote:
+1
Some minor remarks (which are not too problematic IMO):
- The format of the md5 files is a bit unusual. Other components
typically use a format like
f88520ed791673aed6cc4591bc058b55 *commons-logging-1.1.1-bin.zip
I created them on people.a.o after uploading the files
+1
Some minor remarks (which are not too problematic IMO):
- The format of the md5 files is a bit unusual. Other components
typically use a format like
f88520ed791673aed6cc4591bc058b55 *commons-logging-1.1.1-bin.zip
- When building the source distribution with maven2 LICENSE and NOTICE
are n
+1
cheers
--
Torsten
On 22.11.2007, at 00:37, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
This is the fourth attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last go:
- The manifests now has the correct X-Compile-Target-JDK in them
- The manifests no longer mention Jakarta
- [LOGGING-118] Generate
+1
2007/11/22, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi
>
> This is the fourth attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last go:
> - The manifests now has the correct X-Compile-Target-JDK in them
> - The manifests no longer mention Jakarta
> - [LOGGING-118] Generate sourc
Hi
This is the fourth attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last go:
- The manifests now has the correct X-Compile-Target-JDK in them
- The manifests no longer mention Jakarta
- [LOGGING-118] Generate source and binary archives.
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira
This vote has been canceled.
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
This is the third attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The manifest used in the artifacts now has the correct (non-SNAPSHOT)
version in it
- The file build-testing.xml is included in the distribution
On 20/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> >>> On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> >>>
> > There does not seem to have been a final de
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
There does not seem to have been a final decision (or even summary) of
the e-mail thread, which is a pity. Probably ought to be on t
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sebb wrote:
> >
> >>> There does not seem to have been a final decision (or even summary) of
> >>> the e-mail thread, which is a pity. Probably ought to
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
There does not seem to have been a final decision (or even summary) of
the e-mail thread, which is a pity. Probably ought to be on the
developer section of the commons site.
Consensus was not reached, so
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
>
> > There does not seem to have been a final decision (or even summary) of
> > the e-mail thread, which is a pity. Probably ought to be on the
> > developer section of the commons site.
>
> Consensus was not reached, so I didn
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hear what you are saying, but at the time the was not even status quo,
because there was no component that had been released with Maven 2.
Therefor it was difficult to copy/paste a solution from another component.
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I hear what you are saying, but at the time the was not even status quo,
> because there was no component that had been released with Maven 2.
> Therefor it was difficult to copy/paste a solution from another component.
>
Didn't [fileup
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This i
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rahul Akolkar wrote:
>
> > Also, to reduce tangents on vote threads, if you are going to roll the
> > distros again based on these changes, perhaps you can just point to
> > the files and let those who want to take a look do so without call
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sebb wrote:
> >>> On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
I'll change this. Should it be changed to "Apache Commons Logging" or
simply "Commons Logging"? This is what we currently have:
Specification-Title: Jakarta Commons Logging
Specification-Vendo
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since th
On 11/18/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not sure. Maybe I didn't 'svn up' locally between r595118 and tagging...
> I've seen that happen a couple of times in the past. The correct files
> were tagged though, so no big deal.
>
Ah, that makes sense. And yup, no big deal (just appe
On 11/19/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> >
> > I'll change this. Should it be changed to "Apache Commons Logging" or
> > simply "Commons Logging"? This is what we currently have:
> >
> > Specification-Title: Jakarta Commons Logging
> > Specification-Vendor
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the third attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The manifest used in the artifacts now has the correct (non-SNAPSHOT)
version in it
Two of the manifests
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A cou
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sebb wrote:
> >>> On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A couple of minor bugs were f
On 19/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
> >>
> >> Changes since the last try:
> >> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE an
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the third attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The manifest used in the artifacts now has the correct (non-SNAPSHOT)
version in it
Two of the manifests don't have versions:
jav
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A couple of minor bugs were f
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19/11/2007, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some files in the tagged directory tree are not in the distribution zip:
xdocs
On 19/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19/11/2007, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > > On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Some files in the tagged directory tree are not in the distribution
>
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last try:
> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
> place in all distributables
> - A couple of minor bugs were fi
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last try:
> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
> place in all distributables
> - A couple of minor bugs were fi
On 19/11/2007, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Some files in the tagged directory tree are not in the distribution zip:
> > > >
> > > > xdocs/**
> > > > build-testing.xml
> >
sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Some files in the tagged directory tree are not in the distribution zip:
> > >
> > > xdocs/**
> > > build-testing.xml
> > > commons-logging-api.pom
> > > doap_logging.rdf
> > > PROPOSAL.html
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the third attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last try:
> - The manifest used in the artifacts now has the correct (non-SNAPSHOT)
> version in it
Two of the manifests don't have versions:
javadoc
Hi
This is the third attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The manifest used in the artifacts now has the correct (non-SNAPSHOT)
version in it
- The file build-testing.xml is included in the distribution
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Rel
This vote has been canceled.
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A couple of minor bugs were fixed
Release No
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 18/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
> >>>
> >>> Changes since the l
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Oliver Heger wrote:
Don't know how important this is, but the "Implementation-Version:"
entry in the manifests of the jars seems to be incorrect. It runs
"1.1.1-SNAPSHOT".
That's a blocker to me. I'll look into it.
This was because logging uses its own manifest file,
Oliver Heger wrote:
Don't know how important this is, but the "Implementation-Version:"
entry in the manifests of the jars seems to be incorrect. It runs
"1.1.1-SNAPSHOT".
That's a blocker to me. I'll look into it.
Building the source distribution with maven 1 and 2 works for me,
however the
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in al
Don't know how important this is, but the "Implementation-Version:"
entry in the manifests of the jars seems to be incorrect. It runs
"1.1.1-SNAPSHOT".
Building the source distribution with maven 1 and 2 works for me,
however the artifacts produced by maven 1 also have the -SNAPSHOT suffix.
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
> > On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
> >>
> >> Changes since the last try:
> >> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE an
On 18/11/2007, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
> >
> > Changes since the last try:
> > - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
> >
Not sure. Maybe I didn't 'svn up' locally between r595118 and tagging...
I've seen that happen a couple of times in the past. The correct files
were tagged though, so no big deal.
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
Why did tagging [1] generate noise?
-Rahul
[1] http://tinyurl.com/36fl8g
On 11/18/07, Den
sebb wrote:
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A couple of minor bugs were f
On 11/18/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2007 6:48 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why did tagging [1] generate noise?
>
> You can tag (or copy) with changes in your own local copy - examples:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=549565
> h
On Nov 18, 2007 6:48 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why did tagging [1] generate noise?
You can tag (or copy) with changes in your own local copy - examples:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=549565
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=595980
Niall
> -Rahu
Why did tagging [1] generate noise?
-Rahul
[1] http://tinyurl.com/36fl8g
On 11/18/07, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last try:
> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in t
On 18/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
>
> Changes since the last try:
> - The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
> place in all distributables
> - A couple of minor bugs were fi
Hi
This is the second attempt to release commons-logging 1.1.1.
Changes since the last try:
- The Maven 2 build now packages LICENSE and NOTICE files in the correct
place in all distributables
- A couple of minor bugs were fixed
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.
sebb wrote:
On 08/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Agreed.
The logging site was deployed as part of the TLP move. Unfortunately the
site that got deployed was the one for the not-yet-released 1.1.1 version.
Perhaps the previous version needs to be redeployed?
Well, if som
On 11/8/07, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 08/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Agreed.
> >
> > The logging site was deployed as part of the TLP move. Unfortunately the
> > site that got deployed was the one for the not-yet-released 1.1.1 version.
>
> Perhaps the previou
On 08/11/2007, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> The logging site was deployed as part of the TLP move. Unfortunately the
> site that got deployed was the one for the not-yet-released 1.1.1 version.
Perhaps the previous version needs to be redeployed?
> Rahul Akolkar wrote:
Agreed.
The logging site was deployed as part of the TLP move. Unfortunately the
site that got deployed was the one for the not-yet-released 1.1.1 version.
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
I think this was discussed at some point, and RMs do this slightly
differently perhaps, but I think we should avoid
I think this was discussed at some point, and RMs do this slightly
differently perhaps, but I think we should avoid updating the
component's c.a.o site until the release starts to hit the mirrors.
-Rahul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Thanks Oliver,
I'll look into why those files are missing.
Oliver Heger wrote:
Hi,
the artifacts look good to me. Building from source also worked fine.
The only issue I have is that the jars for the javadocs, sources and
tests do not contain t
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Thanks Oliver,
I'll look into why those files are missing.
Oliver Heger wrote:
Hi,
the artifacts look good to me. Building from source also worked fine.
The only issue I have is that the jars for the javadocs, sources and
tests do not contain the LICENSE and NOTICE fi
Same for me - other than the LICENSE/NOTICE, +1 for release.
The jrockit thing is not release-critical I think. It probably is a real
bug. However it only would affect users who use jrockit with a security
manager. JRockit has almost no presence as a browser plugin AFAIK, and
usually server code d
Thanks Oliver,
I'll look into why those files are missing.
Oliver Heger wrote:
Hi,
the artifacts look good to me. Building from source also worked fine.
The only issue I have is that the jars for the javadocs, sources and
tests do not contain the LICENSE and NOTICE files. I think these files
Hi,
the artifacts look good to me. Building from source also worked fine.
The only issue I have is that the jars for the javadocs, sources and
tests do not contain the LICENSE and NOTICE files. I think these files
must be contained in all artifacts we distribute.
Otherwise I'd be +1.
Oliver
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
+1
I think, we agreed to mention the strange behavior of JRockit in the wiki,
it's anyway only the unit test that is hit.
- Jörg
-
To uns
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> What is your conclusion? Should we leave things the way they are and
> maybe add JRockit as a "known issue" on the wiki?
I suppose so. I debugged the code with different JDKs/JREs and so I can
report the the security test cases work on all my JDKs (including I
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote on Sunday, October 21, 2007 12:40 AM:
> What is your conclusion? Should we leave things the way they are and
> maybe add JRockit as a "known issue" on the wiki?
well, just from my short look, I did not grok all the code in the
MockingSecurityManager in detail at
What is your conclusion? Should we leave things the way they are and
maybe add JRockit as a "known issue" on the wiki?
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
Release Not
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Jörg Schaible wrote:
>> Hi Dennis,
>>
>> Dennis Lundberg wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
>>>
>>> Release Notes:
>>>
>>
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310484&styleName=Html&version=12312160
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310484&styleName=Html&version=12312160
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/re
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
Hi
It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310484&styleName=Html&version=12312160
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/l
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
>
> Release Notes:
>
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310484&styleName=Html&version=12312160
>
> Tag:
>
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/logging/tag
Hi
It's about time to get commons-logging 1.1.1 released.
Release Notes:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310484&styleName=Html&version=12312160
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/logging/tags/commons-logging-1.1.1/
Staged repository:
http://p
88 matches
Mail list logo
