On 26/10/2008, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all > > A commons-net 1.5.0 RC has been tagged, and available for review at
Is the correct tag NET_1_5_0_RC1 ? There are two other tags: NET_1_5_0_RC2 NET_1_5_0_RC3 which seem to be older than RC1. That's very confusing. I assume RC1 must have been recreated. If RC2 and RC3 they are no longer relevant, they should be deleted, but it might have been better to create RC4. > http://people.apache.org/~rwinston/commons-net-1.5.0-RC1/ > > Please vote for release as you feel appropriate. Hashes and sigs look OK. Licence and Notice files look OK. However the binary jar is not OK - it should not contain the examples classes, especially since they are not in the correct package. Failed tests: testSetReaderThread(org.apache.commons.net.telnet.TelnetClientTest) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test set: org.apache.commons.net.telnet.TelnetClientTest ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tests run: 8, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 43.562 sec <<< FAILURE! testSetReaderThread(org.apache.commons.net.telnet.TelnetClientTest) Time elapsed: 5 sec <<< FAILURE! junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Expected negotiation1_ok to be true, got false at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20) at org.apache.commons.net.telnet.TelnetClientTest.testSetReaderThread(TelnetClientTest.java:826) -1 because of the binary jar and the test failure. > Thanks > Rory > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
