[GitHub] maven-indexer issue #12: resolve performance loss due to lucene 4.8.1 - upgr...

Github user carlspring commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/pull/12 @cstamas : Would you mind reviewing this and maybe merging it? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project

[GitHub] maven issue #103: spelling: excident

Github user jsoref commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/103 I can live with that. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, o

Re: Progress check for 3.5.0

Le dimanche 29 janvier 2017, 22:11:16 CET Michael Osipov a écrit : > Am 2017-01-29 um 20:47 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY: > > resolver integration is ready in MNG-6110 branch: please review > > I'll merge in 48h > > I believe that bfc35976e2883bb922ef6e1787917a28215532b7 and > 37c936d0ff778967dd4d9f68edf

Re: [IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

Am 01/31/17 um 01:11 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > So this sounds like the original tests are wrong. Correct. They do not catch parent resolution failures although they should have detected them. > > As such we shipped broken versions of Maven. It wasn't ever our intent that > those projects work

Re: [IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

So this sounds like the original tests are wrong. As such we shipped broken versions of Maven. It wasn't ever our intent that those projects work with 3.3.x rather a bug in the tests. In that regard *my* personal pref is that all these tests have the range starting from [3.2.2,) which would mean

Re: [IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

Am 01/30/17 um 23:19 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > I find it hard to follow your explanations as to what the change is, but I > think I understand... > > could you try and rephrase what your change is because the current phrasing > is rather more alarming than I suspect it is 1. The commit to the c

Re: [IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

(I am trying to confirm my understanding of the diff: https://github.com/apache/maven-integration-testing/compare/master...MNG-2199 On 30 January 2017 at 22:19, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > I find it hard to follow your explanations as to what the change is, but I

Re: [IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

I find it hard to follow your explanations as to what the change is, but I think I understand... could you try and rephrase what your change is because the current phrasing is rather more alarming than I suspect it is On 30 January 2017 at 18:34, Christian Schulte wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to m

[ANN] Apache Maven Wagon 2.12 released

The Apache Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the ApacheMaven Wagon, version 2.12. https://maven.apache.org/wagon/ Release Notes - Maven Wagon - version 2.12 ** Bug * [WAGON-408] - ITs for #testSecuredGet() fail with Windows * [WAGON-426] - Fingerprints loss in known_hos

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Maven Wagon version 2.12

Hi, The vote has passed with the following result: +1: Michael Osipov, Karl Heinz Marbaise, Olivier Lamy +0: Dan Tran PMC quorum: reached I will promote the artifacts to the central repo, the source release ZIP file and add this release the board report.

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Wagon version 2.12

Am 2017-01-30 um 00:39 schrieb Dan Tran: +0 this release works at my side, however the Http HugeFileDownloadTest almost double between 2.11 (dropped) and 2.12. 162 sec versus 301 sec on my virtual Centos 7 4CPU, OpenJDK 7 Sorry about late response May want to have an explanation for the d

[IT] MNG-2199 for 3.5.0

Hi, I'd like to merge the MNG-2199 branch to master for 3.5.0. I think this should really go into 3.5.0 and not 3.5.1. Anyone second that? I tried to explain things as much as possible in the commit messages. There also is one IT which needs to be deprecated because it is testing an invalid projec