Mark Thomas wrote:
> Rémy Maucherat wrote:
>> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 16:10 +, Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> Do the (unless there is a pressing need - eg a major security issue) final
>>> stable release of 6.0.x.
>>> Freeze development of the 6.0.x branch.
>> -1. Branches should continue to be open as l
On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:37 PM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 16:10 +, Mark Thomas wrote:
Do the (unless there is a pressing need - eg a major security
issue) final
stable release of 6.0.x.
Freeze development of the 6.0.x branch.
-1. Branches should continue to be open as lon
Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 16:10 +, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> Do the (unless there is a pressing need - eg a major security issue) final
>> stable release of 6.0.x.
>> Freeze development of the 6.0.x branch.
>
> -1. Branches should continue to be open as long as committers want
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 16:10 +, Mark Thomas wrote:
> Do the (unless there is a pressing need - eg a major security issue) final
> stable release of 6.0.x.
> Freeze development of the 6.0.x branch.
-1. Branches should continue to be open as long as committers want to
propose patches and make rel
Mark Thomas wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Contrawise, why wait, and why a tag? Usually most efforts (in order to
preserve history) branch from trunk or branches, whereas tags/* reflect
an endpoint (end of history). Simply branch from 6.0.x unless there are
dirty secrets buried in there :)
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> jean-frederic clere wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> Mark Thomas wrote:
svn cp
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> jean-frederic clere wrote:
>>
>>> Why Friday? Shouldn't we wait until 6.0.15 (or 6.0.15 + n) is voted
>>> stable?
>>>
>>s
>> We can do if that is the preference. My motivation is that I am keen
>> to get
>> back to a CTR codebase asap as
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
svn cp
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
svn cp
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/t
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 10:03 +, Mark Thomas wrote:
> jean-frederic clere wrote:
> > Why Friday? Shouldn't we wait until 6.0.15 (or 6.0.15 + n) is voted
> stable?
>
> We can do if that is the preference. My motivation is that I am keen
> to get
> back to a CTR codebase asap as I find only having
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> jean-frederic clere wrote:
>>
>>> Why Friday? Shouldn't we wait until 6.0.15 (or 6.0.15 + n) is voted
>>> stable?
>>>
>>
>> We can do if that is the preference. My motivation is that I am keen
>> to get
>> back to a CTR codebase asap as
Mark Thomas wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Why Friday? Shouldn't we wait until 6.0.15 (or 6.0.15 + n) is voted stable?
We can do if that is the preference. My motivation is that I am keen to get
back to a CTR codebase asap as I find only having RTC a real pain.
he he, I think ev
jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Why Friday? Shouldn't we wait until 6.0.15 (or 6.0.15 + n) is voted stable?
We can do if that is the preference. My motivation is that I am keen to get
back to a CTR codebase asap as I find only having RTC a real pain.
Mark
--
Good point
+1
Peter
Am 01.11.2007 um 09:51 schrieb jean-frederic clere:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
svn cp
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags
Mark Thomas wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> svn cp
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
Mark Thomas wrote:
> svn cp
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_15
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
>
> Changes to .../trunk
HI,
what I miss is the bundle of the following include
The file is reference at web-jsptaglibrary_2_1.xsd and web-app_2_5.xsd.
Can it be that schemaResolver at o.a.c.startup.DigesterFactory must
be also registered all
included xml schemas for standalone resolving?
Original schema files at
Remy Maucherat wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> Next attempt.
>>
>> Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
>> below.
>>
>> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
>>
>> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/
jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> Next attempt.
>>>
>>> Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
>>> below.
>>>
>>> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_14
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.1.0/trunk
RTC on tc6.0.x/trunk
RTC on .../6.1.x/
On Oct 5, 2007, at 8:07 AM, Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified
proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.apac
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> jean-frederic clere wrote:
>> Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>>
>>> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>>>
jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>
>>> Next attempt.
>>>
>>>
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
below.
svn cp https://
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>> jean-frederic clere wrote:
>>> Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
> Next attempt.
>
> Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
> below.
>
> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Can we wait a bit, there are a few bug fixes that need to be caught up
on , and I also think we can improve upon the server.xml invalid
attribute implementation, the way I did the sandbox. I'll come up withe
patches for the bug and the fixes for the invalid attrib
Remy Maucherat wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
sv
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.apache
Remy Maucherat wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> Next attempt.
>>
>> Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
>> below.
>>
>> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
>>
>> svn cp https://svn.apache.org/
++1
Am 05.10.2007 um 14:07 schrieb Remy Maucherat:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified
proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.ap
Mark Thomas wrote:
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_14
ht
Next attempt.
Taking account of the comments so far, a slightly modified proposal is
below.
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk
svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/tags/TOMCAT_6_0_14
https://svn.apache.org/
Mark Thomas wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Actually, the way it typically works at httpd-space (which your new
>> policy is based on) is that you would next create 6.1.0 as a forever
>> development branch. Committers apply each patch they believe belongs
>> to the 6.2.0 release, and thing
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>> Actually, the way it typically works at httpd-space (which your new
>>> policy is based on) is that you would next create 6.1.0 as a forever
>>> development branch. Committers apply each patch they believe belongs
Mark Thomas wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Actually, the way it typically works at httpd-space (which your new
>> policy is based on) is that you would next create 6.1.0 as a forever
>> development branch. Committers apply each patch they believe belongs
>> to the 6.2.0 release, and thing
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Actually, the way it typically works at httpd-space (which your new
> policy is based on) is that you would next create 6.1.0 as a forever
> development branch. Committers apply each patch they believe belongs
> to the 6.2.0 release, and things are removed and readded
Mark Thomas wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> In light of the recent vote, we need to make some changes to svn. In
>>> short we need to add:
>>> 6.2.x
>> ? Where is 6.1.0, or in other words, why the skip?
>
> The idea was to use even numbers for stable releases, odd n
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> In light of the recent vote, we need to make some changes to svn. In
>> short we need to add:
>> 6.2.x
>
> ? Where is 6.1.0, or in other words, why the skip?
The idea was to use even numbers for stable releases, odd numbers for
alpha/beta. I wo
Mark Thomas wrote:
> In light of the recent vote, we need to make some changes to svn. In
> short we need to add:
> 6.2.x
? Where is 6.1.0, or in other words, why the skip?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additio
39 matches
Mail list logo