On 18/07/2006 7:56 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Just got to an internet connection, but I don't see a jira for this. Has
> one been filed already?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:23 PM
> To: Ma
essage-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:23 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: RE: [vote] maven war 2.0.1
Just catching up on old email, but we started using 2.0.1 and
immediately started having packaging problems. It seems that the main
project w
Just got to an internet connection, but I don't see a jira for this. Has
one been filed already?
-Original Message-
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:23 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: RE: [vote] maven war 2.0.1
Just catching up o
Mark Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:47 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [vote] maven war 2.0.1
Looks like a regression has crept into 2.0.1 regarding web.xml when
overlaying wars - it is subject to the normal if-newer timestamp checks
for war overlay reso
I forgot to post the result on this one...
+1 (binding): Emmanuel, Brett, Stephane
+1 (committer): Fabrice
+1 (user): Thierry
I'm not going to post the announcement on this one until we decide if
there'll be a 2.0.2 which I'll merge if we do.
... Brett
I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.
There's a test to explicitly test this. Do you have a test case?
- Brett
On 28/06/2006 7:47 PM, Mark Hobson wrote:
Looks like a regression has crept into 2.0.1 regarding web.xml when
overlaying wars - it is subject to the normal if-newer timestamp
checks for war overlay resources rather than th
Looks like a regression has crept into 2.0.1 regarding web.xml when
overlaying wars - it is subject to the normal if-newer timestamp
checks for war overlay resources rather than the main project web.xml
always taking precedence. I assume this is not intended behaviour?
Mark
On 27/06/06, Thierry
+1
2006/6/27, Fabrice Bellingard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+1
On 6/27/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.1 to fix two major regressions in
> the 2.0 release. I will also release maven-archiver 2.1 as part of this.
>
> Release Notes - Maven 2.x War
+1
On 6/27/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.1 to fix two major regressions in
the 2.0 release. I will also release maven-archiver 2.1 as part of this.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x War Plugin - Version 2.0.1
** Bug
* [MWAR-34] - Maven Puts Arbitra
+1
Emmanuel
Brett Porter a écrit :
I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.1 to fix two major regressions in
the 2.0 release. I will also release maven-archiver 2.1 as part of this.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x War Plugin - Version 2.0.1
** Bug
* [MWAR-34] - Maven Puts Arbitrary Extension Defini
+1
On 6/27/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.1 to fix two major regressions in
the 2.0 release. I will also release maven-archiver 2.1 as part of this.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x War Plugin - Version 2.0.1
** Bug
* [MWAR-34] - Maven Puts Arbitrar
I'd like to release the WAR plugin 2.0.1 to fix two major regressions in
the 2.0 release. I will also release maven-archiver 2.1 as part of this.
Release Notes - Maven 2.x War Plugin - Version 2.0.1
** Bug
* [MWAR-34] - Maven Puts Arbitrary Extension Definition in WAR Manifest
by Default.
* [
ecause the WEB-INF/lib cab be different from the classpath in the test
cases.
But the others goodies are well.
- Olivier
-Message d'origine-
De : Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : dimanche 14 mai 2006 22:38
À : Maven Developers List
Objet : [vote] maven war 2.0.1
Mave
the others goodies are well.
- Olivier
-Message d'origine-
De : Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : dimanche 14 mai 2006 22:38
À : Maven Developers List
Objet : [vote] maven war 2.0.1
Maven 2.0 had a fairly decent regression:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-38
+0
s/
On 5/14/06, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maven 2.0 had a fairly decent regression:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-38
which appears to have been caused by:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-7 (though the fix should support both)
I'm surprised nobody noticed this during
+1
Emmanuel
Brett Porter a écrit :
Maven 2.0 had a fairly decent regression:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-38
which appears to have been caused by:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-7 (though the fix should support both)
I'm surprised nobody noticed this during the testing period. I
Maven 2.0 had a fairly decent regression:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-38
which appears to have been caused by:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MWAR-7 (though the fix should support both)
I'm surprised nobody noticed this during the testing period. Is nobody
using EJBs any more? :)
An
17 matches
Mail list logo
