I'll re-publish the site tonight (vote stays open).
Kristian
2015-05-31 21:42 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise :
> Hi Kristian,
>
> checked SHA1 Ok.
>
> Checked with Maven 2.2.1, 3.0.5, 3.2.5, 3.3.3
> without any issue...
>
> so +1 from me...
>
> on the generated site has a little problem:
>
> htt
GitHub user Tibor17 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/95
[SUREFIRE-1158] Remove console println of TestNG configurator
Some refactoring and implementation for this issue.
These lines are printed with debug (mvn -X) or show-errors (mvn -e):
Hi Kristian,
checked SHA1 Ok.
Checked with Maven 2.2.1, 3.0.5, 3.2.5, 3.3.3
without any issue...
so +1 from me...
on the generated site has a little problem:
http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-assembly-plugin-LATEST/
The list of xsd's is a little bit screwed upbut this will n
Mirko; I was thinking one stage, vote one for everything. But I realized
what I just want is for combined releases to "work" so we can have a "safe"
process that releases shared code and plugins in the same release. Right
now we have to break the build to to that.
K
2015-05-31 20:24 GMT+02:00 Mi
Hello Kristian,
sorry for asking, could you be more specific:
- Should they all go to a common staging repository, so testing them
together is easier.
- Should there only be one vote process?
What does combined mean for you here?
Regards
Mirko
--
Sent from my mobile
Am 31.05.2015 10:38 schrieb
+1
> On May 31, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Kristian Rosenvold
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We solved 3
> issues:https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12332381&styleName=Text&projectId=12317220
>
> This release fixes a somewhat nasty regression in 2.5.4 when creating
> jar files. Sti
Hi,
We solved 3
issues:https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12332381&styleName=Text&projectId=12317220
This release fixes a somewhat nasty regression in 2.5.4 when creating
jar files. Still 2.2.1 jdk 1.5 compatible.
There are still a couple of issues left in
JIRA:https
Great, thanks Baptiste.
> On May 31, 2015, at 4:36 AM, Baptiste Mathus wrote:
>
> See https://github.com/mojohaus/convert-to-git for MojoHaus (previously
> Mojo@Codehaus).
> Though a bit rough a the main script being a bit oriented towards the Mojo
> SVN, it has no real specificities wrt SVN->Gi
Beware that using the diff format, you're gonna lose the commit information
(author, committer...). With SVN you don't have any other choice, but with
Git it would be a waste IMO.
Cheers
2015-05-29 13:29 GMT+02:00 Tamas Cservenak :
> Sry, I sent the “resolved” URL, here is the real one:
>
> http
if you look at shared content, there is so much diversity that it would not
make sense to release everything with 1 version
http://maven.apache.org/shared/index.html
there is also the special maven-reporting-api case where this would wreck
havoc
we'll need to find another idea
Regards,
Hervé
Oh well, I suppose what I /really/ want to fix is making combined releases
work.
K
2015-05-31 10:05 GMT+02:00 Mirko Friedenhagen :
> +1 for Jason's procedure.
>
> Regards
> Mirko
> --
> Sent from my mobile
> Am 30.05.2015 17:18 schrieb "Jason van Zyl" :
>
> > If they have truly separate develo
See https://github.com/mojohaus/convert-to-git for MojoHaus (previously
Mojo@Codehaus).
Though a bit rough a the main script being a bit oriented towards the Mojo
SVN, it has no real specificities wrt SVN->Git migration, so it should be
at least a good starting point.
I can privide help, or help a
+1 for Jason's procedure.
Regards
Mirko
--
Sent from my mobile
Am 30.05.2015 17:18 schrieb "Jason van Zyl" :
> If they have truly separate development cycles, then I think it best to
> try and move toward meaningful (semantic) versioning for each component.
> Which means they have their own vers
13 matches
Mail list logo
