Hi guys,
It seems I hit a regression in 2.0.9 or a weird behavior. I am unable to use
a snapshot plugin with 2.0.9, it constantly uses the release version even
when I use the -U flag or I set the snapshot update policy to "always".
Switching to 2.0.8 works just fine.
See also http://jira.codehaus.
Oleg Gusakov wrote:
I remember that wagon, at least 1.0-beta-4, strips everything after " *"
in the signature file including, so it should already be implemented on
the reading side. Wagon team - please correct me if I am wrong - I did
not check out the wagon source.
The checksum verificatio
I remember that wagon, at least 1.0-beta-4, strips everything after " *"
in the signature file including, so it should already be implemented on
the reading side. Wagon team - please correct me if I am wrong - I did
not check out the wagon source.
So we'll have to add it to the writing side of
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Brian E Fox, Oliver Lamy, Arnaud Heritier, Vincent
Siveton, Emmanuel Venisse, Herve Boutemy, Dennis Lundberg
+1 (non binding): Mauro Talevi, Marten Storm
I will move artifacts to central repo.
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> It t
+1
Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> It time to release our Stylus skin. To start off we need to get a new
> release of maven-skins parent 4 out, so that we later can release
> maven-stylus-skin. This is to comply with the new with the new Privacy
> policy.
>
> Diff of the POM since the last relea
Not to mention, that there is already a lot of files generated by md5sum and
sha1sum apps on central:
http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/log4j/log4j/maven-metadata.xml.md5
http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/log4j/log4j/maven-metadata.xml.sha1
But in the above cases, the path is obviously misleading.
~t~
O
Brian Fox wrote:
I'm -1 to making a new format
Just to make sure we all have the same understanding: The proposed
format is not "new" as in "yet another checksum format". It's an already
existing format used by the md5sum tool (compare the format attribute of
Ant's checksum task [0]).
Be
I'm -1 to making a new format, but ambivalent about changing it to
match openssl standards
--Brian (mobile)
On Jan 2, 2009, at 5:31 AM, Benjamin Bentmann
wrote:
Hi,
With regard to MINSTALL-47, I would like to discuss if we can/should
change the format used for checksum files generate
Hi,
With regard to MINSTALL-47, I would like to discuss if we can/should
change the format used for checksum files generated by Maven.
Currently, Maven outputs the plain checksum as-is to the checksum file
(cf. [1]), e.g.
1dbbdec30feca97198d5d7e96d42dc57
In the mentioned issue, it was requ
