Re: Binary release artifacts (or What a User Wants)

2010-03-17 Thread Ian Holsman
On 3/18/10 8:21 AM, Eric Evans wrote: During the 0.6 cycle Ivy was introduced to manage (most of) our dependencies, and where possible, jars were removed from svn and no longer included in binary release artifacts. Recently though this change has been called into question, with some discussion ta

Re: [VOTE] Release 0.6.0-beta3

2010-03-17 Thread Ian Holsman
+1 [binding] On 3/18/10 7:13 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: +1 [binding] On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Eric Evans wrote: It's been a bit since the last beta, and while many important fixes have made their way in[1], we're still not quite ready to roll a release candidate. I propose one more

Re: Binary release artifacts (or What a User Wants)

2010-03-17 Thread Paul Querna
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Paul Querna wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Eric Evans wrote: >> >> During the 0.6 cycle Ivy was introduced to manage (most of) our >> dependencies, and where possible, jars were removed from svn and no >> longer included in binary release artifacts. Re

Re: Binary release artifacts (or What a User Wants)

2010-03-17 Thread Paul Querna
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Eric Evans wrote: > > During the 0.6 cycle Ivy was introduced to manage (most of) our > dependencies, and where possible, jars were removed from svn and no > longer included in binary release artifacts. Recently though this change > has been called into question, w

Re: [VOTE] Release 0.6.0-beta3

2010-03-17 Thread Chris Goffinet
+1 On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Gary Dusbabek wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 14:17, Eric Evans wrote: > > > > It's been a bit since the last beta, and while many important fixes have > > made their way in[1], we're still not quite ready to roll a release > > candidate. I propose on

Re: [VOTE] Release 0.6.0-beta3

2010-03-17 Thread Gary Dusbabek
+1 On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 14:17, Eric Evans wrote: > > It's been a bit since the last beta, and while many important fixes have > made their way in[1], we're still not quite ready to roll a release > candidate. I propose one more beta in order to get some of this new work > tested while we're cl

Binary release artifacts (or What a User Wants)

2010-03-17 Thread Eric Evans
During the 0.6 cycle Ivy was introduced to manage (most of) our dependencies, and where possible, jars were removed from svn and no longer included in binary release artifacts. Recently though this change has been called into question, with some discussion taking place in CASSANDRA-850[1]. The 0.

Re: [VOTE] Release 0.6.0-beta3

2010-03-17 Thread Jonathan Ellis
+1 [binding] On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Eric Evans wrote: > > It's been a bit since the last beta, and while many important fixes have > made their way in[1], we're still not quite ready to roll a release > candidate. I propose one more beta in order to get some of this new work > tested wh

[VOTE] Release 0.6.0-beta3

2010-03-17 Thread Eric Evans
It's been a bit since the last beta, and while many important fixes have made their way in[1], we're still not quite ready to roll a release candidate. I propose one more beta in order to get some of this new work tested while we're closing out the remaining issues[2]. Tag and artifacts for 0.6.0

Re: GMane groups updated with new mailing list addresses

2010-03-17 Thread Ted Zlatanov
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:26:10 -0500 Jonathan Ellis wrote: JE> 2010/3/16 Ted Zlatanov : >> I requested this yesterday and it's done: you can read the mailing lists >> through GMane again, they are changed to the new addresses.  The >> addresses are (NNTP protocol) >> >> news.gmane.org:gmane.comp.

Default Texception

2010-03-17 Thread shirish
Hello, Here is the code that i used to *get_slice* could any one correct me where I went wrong. The code compiles right but gives me a Default TException vector lcosc; SlicePredicate sp; sp.column_names.push_back("thread1"); sp.column_names.push_back("thread2");