Agh ok, I only read the sentence at the top not the see more below...
Somebody should fix that as the top section makes it seem the way I thought
esp the way it calls it out,
On Wednesday, 21 March 2012, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Mar 20, 2012, at 5:23 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
>>
>> Actually
On Mar 20, 2012, at 5:23 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> Actually -1 votes don't count. You cannot veto releases, you only
> need 3 x +1... so we could have 3 x +1 and 21 x -1 and the release
> manager is still allowed to proceed with the release! [It would be bad
> form to proceed from my PoV,
On 3/20/12 5:23 PM, "Stephen Connolly"
wrote:
>On 20 March 2012 22:49, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Jason Chaffee
>> wrote:
>>> Just a suggestion.
>>>
>>> If you can find some people who are not currently commuters and are
>>> interested in do thing just this ve
On 20 March 2012 22:49, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Jason Chaffee
> wrote:
>> Just a suggestion.
>>
>> If you can find some people who are not currently commuters and are
>> interested in do thing just this very thing, could they be a partial
>> committer, only work
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>> 2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hello Folks,
>
> The default preemptive on for GET is proba
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Jason Chaffee
wrote:
> Just a suggestion.
>
> If you can find some people who are not currently commuters and are
> interested in do thing just this very thing, could they be a partial
> committer, only working on the RPM's and not the other parts of maven?
>
> In
2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>> 2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>>
Hello Folks,
The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
Imagine the following case, in your settin
No problem with adding committers...
Demonstrate commitment to the project.
Produce good patches, and presto chango, we will invite you.
My point is that even if you were a committer, the Apache by-laws
state that the PMC must vote at least 3 x +1 to release a binary, so
if you cannot find 3 of
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Folks,
>>>
>>> The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
>>> Imagine the following case, in your settings you have:
>>>
>>>
>>>
2012/3/20 Brian Fox :
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>
>> Hello Folks,
>>
>> The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
>> Imagine the following case, in your settings you have:
>>
>>
>> olamy
>> reallycomplicatedpassword
>> foo.org
>>
Just a suggestion.
If you can find some people who are not currently commuters and are
interested in do thing just this very thing, could they be a partial
committer, only working on the RPM's and not the other parts of maven?
In my opinion, this is the spirit of open source software. I know
ev
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hello Folks,
>
> The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
> Imagine the following case, in your settings you have:
>
>
> olamy
> reallycomplicatedpassword
> foo.org
>
>
> During dependencies resolution
On Tue, March 20, 2012 7:19 am, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
>
> I would *really* like for maven to produce RPMs as alternative dist
> output, but I understand your position. I had a quick look into
> rpm-maven-plugin and I believe a reasonable RPM output could be achieved
> by using it in with non-
On 3/20/12 12:58 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
Hello Folks,
The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
Imagine the following case, in your settings you have:
olamy
reallycomplicatedpassword
foo.org
During dependencies resolution, you get a pom with a r
Hello Folks,
The default preemptive on for GET is probably a bad idea.
Imagine the following case, in your settings you have:
olamy
reallycomplicatedpassword
foo.org
During dependencies resolution, you get a pom with a repository.
foo.org
http://your
On Mar 20, 2012, at 10:19 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
>
> I would *really* like for maven to produce RPMs as alternative dist
> output, but I understand your position. I had a quick look into
> rpm-maven-plugin and I believe a reasonable RPM output could be achieved
> by using it in with non
To get the RPMs released, you are going to have to find 3xPMC members
willing to vote +1 for each time you run the release.
Your best option is to have the RPMs as a separate module that depends
on org.apache.maven:apache-maven and repackages that producing just an
RPM.
Do not try to integrate it
I would *really* like for maven to produce RPMs as alternative dist
output, but I understand your position. I had a quick look into
rpm-maven-plugin and I believe a reasonable RPM output could be achieved
by using it in with non-default profile. That should also prevent any
problems with building
Stanislav,
If you're going to attempt something do it as an external action that takes the
output of the primary build. Don't make something that augments the standard
build process. That's invasive and for people building on Windows if problems
arise they can't really fix it. If you make an en
+1
Envoyé depuis mon mobile
- Reply message -
De : "Simone Tripodi"
Pour : "Maven Developers List"
Objet : [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Fluido Skin 1.2 based on RC1
Date : lun., mars 19, 2012 11:18
Hi all guys,
I'm opening a thread vote today for releasing Apache Maven Fluido Skin
1.2,
+1
2012/3/19 Simone Tripodi :
> Hi all guys,
> I'm opening a thread vote today for releasing Apache Maven Fluido Skin
> 1.2, based on RC1
>
> We solved 7 issues:
> https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11430&styleName=Html&version=18296
>
> There are still a couple of issues
Quoting Jos Backus (2012-03-19 23:40:43)
>Hi Manfred,
>
>On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Manfred Moser wrote:
>> Jos,
>>
>> I agree with you in the sense that any open source project that cares about
>> a wide user base should try to provide packages of its software that are
>> useful to as many
- Original Message -
> From: "Manfred Moser"
> To: dev@maven.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 12:32:26 AM
> Subject: Re: RPMs for Maven 3?
>
> Jos,
>
> I agree with you in the sense that any open source project that cares
> about a wide user base should try to provide package
23 matches
Mail list logo
