will look into it
On 9/8/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Olivier just flipped the projects that only require JDK 1.4 over to
> that JDK using profiles on Continuum, so we might see some build
> failures for things using APIs from Java 5 that shouldn't be, such as
> this...
>
> Begin
Olivier just flipped the projects that only require JDK 1.4 over to
that JDK using profiles on Continuum, so we might see some build
failures for things using APIs from Java 5 that shouldn't be, such as
this...
Begin forwarded message:
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date:
On 09/09/2007, at 1:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Not using Wagon, our abstraction, and directly focusing on HTTP.
Doesn't that mean adding a bunch of HTTP code, listeners, etc into
the artifact code - and making two places to maintain something
essentially the same, that doesn't really bu
On 8 Sep 07, at 11:38 AM 8 Sep 07, Jorg Heymans wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Anyone have anything else? I'm not trying to consider everything that
Any chance that mvn could indicate the exact pom.xml locations of
duplicated projects ?
No reason why it couldn't, we know the source of eve
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Anyone have anything else? I'm not trying to consider everything that
Any chance that mvn could indicate the exact pom.xml locations of
duplicated projects ?
So instead of this:
[INFO] Project 'te
On 8 Sep 07, at 8:50 AM 8 Sep 07, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 9/7/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7 Sep 07, at 5:20 PM 7 Sep 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I don't currently, but have in the past used file:// for remote.
For deploying or actually pulling? Deploying is a totally differ
On 9/7/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7 Sep 07, at 5:20 PM 7 Sep 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
> > I don't currently, but have in the past used file:// for remote.
> >
>
> For deploying or actually pulling? Deploying is a totally different
> story. I know tons of people who use fil
On 8 Sep 07, at 5:43 AM 8 Sep 07, Mauro Talevi wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 7 Sep 07, at 5:20 PM 7 Sep 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I don't currently, but have in the past used file:// for remote.
For deploying or actually pulling? Deploying is a totally
different story. I know tons of people
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 7 Sep 07, at 5:20 PM 7 Sep 07, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I don't currently, but have in the past used file:// for remote.
For deploying or actually pulling? Deploying is a totally different
story. I know tons of people who use file, dav, scp, and ftp. Strictly
for pullin
Brian E. Fox wrote:
This vote has passed. Jason, since Mauro is already an Apache committer,
I believe only granting of Karma is required.
Please join me in welcoming Mauro!
Thanks to all. It's a pleasure to join the Maven community and look forward to collaborating with
everybody.
Cheers
On Sep 7, 2007, at 4:38 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
Results:
+7 (Binding) Brian, Jason, Brett, Stephane, Lukas, Dennis, Arnaud
+2 (Non Binding) Rafale, Andy,
This vote has passed. I will wrap up the move most likely over the
weekend. It will first go to the sandbox where we will perform the
refactor
Have you guys tried using SVK on the maven tree in the ASF SVN? This
is a really kick ass tool for managing branches and merging repos.
Its like Perforce for SVN... er, well kinda.
I really wanted to use this for Geronimo, but the huge singleton ASF
SVN repo is not really helping out, act
On Sep 4, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Make+Like+Reactor+Mode
"Make" like build behavior mode
Maven currently has a top down build approach where you start at
the top
of a reactor and build all children. One of the most common requests I
get fro
13 matches
Mail list logo
