On Dec 8, 2007 4:00 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/7/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip/> > > > > OK how about I just upload the artifacts manually - that seems the > > simpest solution. > <snap/> > > Sounds good. Do the jars contain LICENSE / NOTICE files? Just saw that > skin-1.0 jars do not!
Unfortunately not :( > > Then we can do a commons-parent release removing the > > dummy repository and upgrading to commons-skin 2. > > > <snip/> > > We need some discussion on that, since: > > * Haven't seen an answer as to why the dummy repo gets chosen i.e. > given the current setup for commons-skin, whether m2 / deploy-plugin > should (theoretically) choose it in the first place? It would seem > that it wasn't chosen atleast once before (which would be how the 1.0 > release was cut), perhaps that is due to differences in plugin > versions used -- which we can lock down, settings.xml minutiae etc. > > * As already pointed out, non-snap versions should never deploy to > rsync repo directly (AIUI, purpose of dummy). > > -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
