On reflection that wasn't the *most* helpful answer :-)
The correct answer is:
Thanks! I've now posted the ASC signatures as well.
Regards, Paul
On 5/30/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hiram
As far as I know I do the PGP signing if/when we get approval and it
goes on www.apac
Hiram
As far as I know I do the PGP signing if/when we get approval and it
goes on www.apache.org and the mirrors.
Paul
On 5/30/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Shouldn't the release be pgp signed?
On 5/30/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> The Synapse communit
Shouldn't the release be pgp signed?
On 5/30/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
The Synapse community has voted
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-synapse-dev/200605.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
to release a Synapse Milestone (M2) release.
This release implements the update
On 5/30/06, Bill Stoddard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just noticed this distribution redistributes (unmodified?)the MPL 1.1
licensed Rhino JavaScript engine. MPL
1.1 is significantly more restrictive than the AL 2. Is this a concern?
MPL1.1 is on Chris's list as a "Class B" license which A
Hi
The Synapse community has voted
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-synapse-dev/200605.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
to release a Synapse Milestone (M2) release.
This release implements the updated configuration language:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Synapse/SynapseConfigurationLangua
The binary has now been rebuilt to address those issues. I'm guessing
we need to restart a vote on activemq dev list just to be formal, but
I'm sure it will pass just like the previous vote did.
On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
README.txt and userGuide.html (at least) should
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
We voted on tuscany-dev on a revised version that addresses the issues
Robert raised below and the results can be viewed at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.webservices.tuscany.devel/3403
We would like to request approval from the Incubator PM
+1
-Brian
On May 26, 2006, at 5:11 AM, James Strachan wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0 release binary.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the release.
Releas
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 5/27/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is STATUS appropriate to be bundled in the release?
>
I had the same question relating to the Tuscany release. In general I
don't think it should as STATUS
On 5/27/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is STATUS appropriate to be bundled in the release?
>
I had the same question relating to the Tuscany release. In general I
don't think it should as STATUS reflects the state of the projec
10 matches
Mail list logo
