Hi Stefan, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2011-03-04, Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >>> On 2011-03-04, Jörg Schaible wrote: > >>>> Since gump messages came in: vfs-1 will not be updated anyway ... > >>> As in "vfs-1 is no longer under any kind of development"? > >> Yes. > >>> If so, we should probably remove it from Gump anyway. > >> Could be interesting, since vfs-2 was generated quite before the first RC >> of what was vfs-1.x before. > > I should probably clarify what I meant with "remove from Gump" and what > I intend to do (either today or over the weekend). > > * Gump will no longer build commons-vfs(1). Yeah, my fear is that vfs 1.0 is so old that some of the projects already depend on a vfs 1.x snapshot. > * all mvn2 or mvn3 project that depend on vfs will get the version they > specify (this only affects Cargo) from the Maven repository. > > * for the Ant built projects that depend on vfs (Ivy, log4j-chainsaw and > vfs2-sandbox) I'll make the 1.0 jar available. When all of them require normally the release, it's fine. > Given that vfs2 comes with a different package name there wouldn't be > any point in trying to use vfs2 as a replacement for vfs1. Exactly. > BTW, is it correct that vfs2 sandbox depends on vfs1 instead of vfs2? > The POM seems to say no but this is how it is set up in Gump (and it > uses Ant instead of mvn2 to build). I don't really see how this could > ever build. Sounds indeed weird. Seems that the Gump descriptor had been forgotten. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
