+1
Verified signatures, checksums, and LICENSE files.
(NOTICE file is missing, but not a blocker, AFAIC.)
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:09 PM Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available for
> voting.
>
> This is the first release and it contains tw
Hi Volkan,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 09:09, Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> (NOTICE file is missing, but not a blocker, AFAIC.)
META-INF/{DEPENDENCIES,LICENSE,NOTICE} are generated by the Apache
Maven Remote Resources plugin (courtesy of the ASF parent POM):
https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-remote-reso
I'm not willing to do anything on any hill here either and I'd rather
gel with the team consensus, I've said my bits ;-)
Gary
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:10 PM Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
>
> Email archives are irrelevant for the provenance of sources; an arbitrary
> tag/commit not sealed with `rel/` pref
Guten Tag Robert Middleton,
am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2023 um 12:38 schrieben Sie:
> Please download, test, and cast your votes on the log4j developers list.
> [] +1, release the artifacts
> [] -1, don't release because...
+1
I've successfully compiled and ran tests using MS Visual Studio 2022
(17.5.5
Hi Team,
We have facing some log4j related vulnerability on our windows host for MS SQL
Server 2017 / 2019.
I have check so many articles, but in that I have not found any proper solution
for resolving that issue.
We want some solution for updating the version of log4j to log4j 2.16 + or if
i
Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
> On May 2, 2023, at 2:08 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>
> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 release is now available for
> voting.
>
> This is the first release and it contains two modules:
>
> * [LOG4J2-3638
And no tag containing the term “rc3” in git, either.
> On May 4, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
>
>> On May 2, 2023, at 2:08 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>>
>> The Apache Log4j Transformation Tools 0.1.0 relea
Hi Matt,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:09, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references to RC2 and RC3?
It's `rel/0.1.0-rc1` due to a bug in the CI scripts. I added
`rel/0.1.0-rc3` right now to partially correct it.
Piotr
The vote email says Tag: rel/0.1.0-rc1. That can’t be correct.
Ralph
> On May 4, 2023, at 1:10 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> And no tag containing the term “rc3” in git, either.
>
>> On May 4, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>>
>> Which tag is it? I see ‘rel/0.1.0-rc1’ and then references
That makes me question what is in the actual release. Tags named “rel/“ are
immutable so you can’t have added anything to that after the first rc.
Ralph
> On May 4, 2023, at 1:31 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:09, Matt Sicker wrote:
>>
>> Which tag is
Hi Ralph,
On Thu, 4 May 2023 at 22:35, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> That makes me question what is in the actual release. Tags named “rel/“ are
> immutable so you can’t have added anything to that after the first rc.
It took me a while to get the automatic release scripts going. So there was:
* re
OK, thanks for the clarification. I do have a strong opinion. Infra made it
clear that rel/ is for tagging releases. Release candidates are NOT releases.
Furthermore, if you find a problem before starting a vote it is very easy to
just delete a non-rel/ tag and rerun the candidate. Once the vote
12 matches
Mail list logo
