> > Upgrading hudson's clover version for our new coverage reports (that
> work correct with backwards branch)
>
> With the new Apache specific license you can now commit the key into
> your svn repository and therefore you might not need to do anything at
> the shell at all. That was my experie
On 28/01/10 5:45 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
Upgrading hudson's clover version for our new coverage reports (that work
correct with backwards branch)
With the new Apache specific license you can now commit the key into your svn
repository and therefore you might not need to do anything at the sh
> - Updating lucene's private SVN tools for the new lucene rev-based
> backwards branch (sparse checkout)
By the way, that's related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2442,
we solved it with a private version extracted from the recent SVN stable branch
solaris build, which is done i
Hi Grant,
that would be an option, but during our work, Mike and me only activated the
"start new build" button in the GUI, everything else was and had to be done in
the shell:
- Updating lucene's private SVN tools for the new lucene rev-based backwards
branch (sparse checkout)
- Upgrading huds
yeah, that's an easy way to do it. +1
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 17:38, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Perhaps there is an in-between here, too. Can't we give access to Hudson
> itself w/o giving access to the machine? That way, Uwe could run and
> configure the jobs (which is the most common task) w
Perhaps there is an in-between here, too. Can't we give access to Hudson
itself w/o giving access to the machine? That way, Uwe could run and configure
the jobs (which is the most common task) w/o necessarily needing to deal w/ the
machine level stuff.
-Grant
On Jan 27, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Ti
On 27/Jan/2010 11:26, Justin Mason wrote:
> Hi Philip --
> it's purely because the user accounts on the Hudson machines have
> quite a lot of privileges.
Anything much more significant than people's privileges via their
people.a.o accounts?
> Personally I'm open to the idea of making an exception
hi Uwe -- sorry for the lack of response at the time :( The same
would apply in your case, IMO.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:47, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> Grant Ingersoll and I were asking for the same before xmas and we also
> proposed that the Lucene PMC could vote for me to be add
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
> Personally I'm open to the idea of making an exception if the AVRO PMC
> call for it, and assuming none of the other Hudson admins are against it.
+1
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Hi Justin,
Grant Ingersoll and I were asking for the same before xmas and we also proposed
that the Lucene PMC could vote for me to be added as a Hudson user. But we got
no definitive response.
It would be fine for me (only committer) to have such access as I currently fix
and have fixed lots
Hi Philip --
it's purely because the user accounts on the Hudson machines have
quite a lot of privileges.
Personally I'm open to the idea of making an exception if the AVRO PMC
call for it, and assuming none of the other Hudson admins are against
it.
--j.
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 01:01, Philip Ze
11 matches
Mail list logo
