This vote has passed with four +1 votes from the following people:
Jochen Wiedmann
Niall Pemberton
James Carman
Jörg Schaible
Thanks, I'll cut the release shortly.
Niall
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to release version 8 of the c
+1
Niall Pemberton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to release version 8 of the commons-parent pom - the changes
> since the last release are:
> - re-order mailing archives
> - configure the maven-bundle-plugin (for OSGi)
> - configure the commons-build-plugin (for OSGi)
> - maven-install-plugin 2.
On 2/28/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK seems like theres a bit of an impasse on this since we disagree.
> Currently there are two +1 votes - if you feel strongly I suggest you
> vote -1 on this release, otherwise if it gets three +1 votes and
> reaches +72hrs I'll release it
OK seems like theres a bit of an impasse on this since we disagree.
Currently there are two +1 votes - if you feel strongly I suggest you
vote -1 on this release, otherwise if it gets three +1 votes and
reaches +72hrs I'll release it.
Niall
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:15 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:15 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27/02/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Niall Pemberton schrieb:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 27/02/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton schrieb:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton schrieb:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL
Niall Pemberton schrieb:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2
On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:07 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 27/02/2008, Jochen Wiedm
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:07 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 27/02/2008, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:4
On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:07 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 27/02/2008, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:42 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2001
> > > >
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:07 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27/02/2008, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:42 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > 2001
> > > 1.3
> > > 1.3
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes. But what's the problem? F
On 27/02/2008, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:42 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 2001
> > 1.3
> > 1.3
>
>
>
> Yes. But what's the problem? For the inceptionYear, that has to be
> specified whenever you use a parent POM. And for the c
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:42 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2001
> 1.3
> 1.3
Yes. But what's the problem? For the inceptionYear, that has to be
specified whenever you use a parent POM. And for the compilation
source and target properties: That has been in the commons-parent PO
The parent POM defines these items:
2001
1.3
1.3
Surely these should (MUST) be defined by the specific child POMs?
On 27/02/2008, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 from me.
>
>
> Niall
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Niall Pemberton
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
+1 from me.
Niall
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to release version 8 of the commons-parent pom - the changes
> since the last release are:
> - re-order mailing archives
> - configure the maven-bundle-plugin (for OSGi)
> - co
+1
--
Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So that you think before
you break 'em.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I'd like to release version 8 of the commons-parent pom - the changes
since the last release are:
- re-order mailing archives
- configure the maven-bundle-plugin (for OSGi)
- configure the commons-build-plugin (for OSGi)
- maven-install-plugin 2.1 --> 2.2
- maven-surefire-plugin 2.3 --> 2
19 matches
Mail list logo