I didn't like the examples stuff being in the "examples" package, but I don't guess that's really a violation or anything. I'd rather see it in o.a.c.net.examples.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:04 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, the binary jar contains an examples/ directory, but it contains > only the class files. > > Surely it should contain the source files instead? > > On 18/09/2008, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The jar files in commons-net-2.0.0-bin.tar are rather inconsistent as >> regards LICENSE and NOTICE files >> >> commons-net-2.0.0.jar has both in META-INF directory >> commons-net-2.0.0-tests.jar does not have either >> commons-net-ftp-2.0.0.jar has both in top-level directory (and it has >> a META-INF dir) >> >> The naming of the files is also a bit odd - why the extra 0 in 2.0.0, >> when the release is called 2.0 elsewhere. The release id should be >> used consistently. >> >> >> On 18/09/2008, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > What tag was this built from in SVN? >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> The RC for net-2.0 is available for review at: >> > >> >> > >> http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-2.0 >> > >> >> > >> Changes are here: >> > >> >> > >> >> http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-2.0/site/changes-report.html#a2.0 >> > >> >> > >> Can someone take a look at the RC and see if there are any issues? If >> not, >> > >> I'll set up a release vote. >> > > >> > > I'm glad you took the time to get a candidate up. I've had this on my >> > > todo list but been busy for a long time. >> > > >> > > I've reviewed the artifacts, two notes: >> > > >> > > * JAR files are not signed and hasn't got a checksum file. >> > > * I can't seem to locate the key that was used to sign the artifacts >> > > (B6E5C0E2) on pgp.mit.edu. I also can't find a KEYS file for commons >> > > (looked in SVN and on the site). >> > > >> > > Besides that it looks fine to me. >> > > >> > > /niklas >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
