On 2/18/14, 10:51 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 18/02/2014 18:24, sebb wrote: >> On 17 February 2014 20:42, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >>> 2.2 fixes a few bugs and adds a new testOnCreate() feature that is >>> required by DBCP 2. >>> >>> >>> The Pool 2.2 RC1 is available for review here: >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/ (r4424) >> Sigs and hashes OK. >> Source archive agrees with SVN tag apart from as noted below >> >>> Maven artifacts are here: >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1008 >>> >>> Details of changes since 2.1 are in the release notes and changelog: >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt >>> http://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/pool-2.2-RC1-site/changes-report.html >>> >>> The tag is here: >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_2_RC1/ >>> (r 1569090) >> Some shell scripts and download_pool.cgi have SVN eol=native. >> Any objections if I change these to LF in trunk? > Yes. What is the point? eol=native means they are easier to work with. > >> The shell scripts are missing from the source release - I assume that >> is intentional? > If you mean the pool*.sh scripts then yes. > >> However, 3 source files in SVN doc/ folder are missing from the source >> release. >> I don't think that should be the case. > Agreed. Need to figure out how to get those included.
I don't think those files are necessary. They are just the source files for the examples in the site xdoc. They are not part of the source distro, not required to build the site. Phil > >> The doap file is also not in the source release; that is to be expected. >> >>> Site: >>> http://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/pool-2.2-RC1-site >>> (Broken links to Javadoc versions expected) >> The Clirr report shows two errors. >> These are due to updating the interfaces >> GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean >> and >> GenericObjectPoolMXBean >> >> The Javadoc for these interfaces states that they are subject to >> change between major releases. >> However this is a minor release. >> >> The Clirr errors need to be explained in the Release Notes. >> Do they have an impact on user code? >> If not, why not? > No, they don't. We went through this for the 2.1 release. See the > archives for why this is OK. > >> @since 2.2 markers are present where relevant. > Thanks for the review. I'll look into getting those files added to the > source distro. > > Mark > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
