file a MEV?
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Vincent Siveton
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 2.1-alpha-2.rip is still present. How to remove it?
>
> Delete it on the ASF side and ping repository@ for someone to remove
> i
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Vincent Siveton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2.1-alpha-2.rip is still present. How to remove it?
Delete it on the ASF side and ping repository@ for someone to remove
it from central, I think.
--
Wendy
Mauro Talevi wrote:
ZipUnarchiver.setEncoding() only controls the encoding for file names
as given by zip entries [1,2], not the encoding of the compressed file
contents [3]. So unless you experience corrupt file names, that
shouldn't be the cause of your problem.
Ok - understood, but should
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
Do you filter the images? AFAIK, the Resources Plugin should not alter a
file's contents during copying unless is enabled on the
set.
Yep - that is indeed the case, I do filter and that is most likely the
root of the issue.
If you filter your web stuff, you will
what I normally do is alter the standard directory layout
I have two folder trees for resources
src/main/resources/filtered
and
src/main/resources/verbatim
for web projects I usually end up with
src/main/webapp
and
src/filtered/webapp
Sent from my iPod
On 30 Aug 2008, at 15:42, Benjamin Bent
Hi,
2.1-alpha-2.rip is still present. How to remove it?
Cheers,
Vincent
2008/8/14 Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I had some trouble with the stage plugin and the release, but I think
> it's all fine now.
>
> (First it died with java.lang.ClassCastException:
> org.apache.maven.wagon.provider
Mauro Talevi wrote:
I've tried setting UTF-8 encoding on resources plugin, but that makes
the images unreadable on Mac.
Do you filter the images? AFAIK, the Resources Plugin should not alter a
file's contents during copying unless is enabled on the
set.
If you filter your web stuff, you
Hi all,
I've hit upon what I think are encoding issues with the dependency
and/or resource plugin, and I'd like to sound out what the others' take
on it is.
So imagine a scenario in which one has a module that encapsulates all
web resources (images, css, js, etc ...) which is shared amongst
Brian E. Fox wrote:
Until I see a definitive list of the Milestones for 2.1, I vote for #2.
I am mostly afraid of going down the rat hole that was the old 2.1 with
forever changing scope. I don't see any problem with calling this 2.1
and putting in the other features into 2.2, what's the problem?
My personal preference is #2
The reasoning behind this is that we'd be introducing yet another
versioning scheme into the mix that we already have. This might be
confusing to our users and as John hinted at might not attract as many
users.
John Casey wrote:
> Okay,
>
> Let's put it to a vote. We
the alternative that I see is if we set a cut-off date for features to
be complete. if all features for 2.1.0 must be completed in 4 weeks
and we leave 4 weeks to stabilize then I don't see the need to give a
definitive list of features for 2.1.0 *now*.
[however as I am not currently an apa
11 matches
Mail list logo
