> > I don't see why it should be "illegal" to publish an RC to the
> > snapshot repo. We do not distinguish "stable", "ga", "beta" etc here
> > in Commons. We have releases and things that are not yet released. I
> > don't see why we need yet another repo for RCs. We - at least I -
> >
On 3/22/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Niall,
> >
> > not sure if I'm part of the gang but I will be there from Sunday to
> > Friday ... :-)
>
>
> Sorry, didn't respond earlier. I think a
On 3/22/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/20/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Anyone planning to be at ApacheCon EU 2008?
> > >
> > > I'm going to be there - perhaps we
On 3/22/08, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > 3) Announce availability of RC, publish RC-labeled jar to snapshot
> > > repo an
On 3/22/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Keeping things at the "vision" level, what I like to do is
> >
> > 1) Once release plan is complete, create an RC tag
> > 2) Build an RC, consisting of
hi,
> Command
> + isValid(options: Options):boolean
> + getDescription():String
> + execute(options:Options):void
> + getPrimaryOption():Option
>
> Each command has a primaryOption which uniquely identifies the command from
> the command line. For example, if you have a command which scale
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=68340&projectId=186
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:42:09 -0700
Finished at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:43:08 -0700
Total time: 59s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build Num
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=68340&projectId=186
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:42:09 -0700
Finished at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:43:08 -0700
Total time: 59s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build Num
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=68339&projectId=156
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:34:33 -0700
Finished at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:37:28 -0700
Total time: 2m 55s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=68339&projectId=156
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:34:33 -0700
Finished at: Sat 22 Mar 2008 19:37:28 -0700
Total time: 2m 55s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 3) Announce availability of RC, publish RC-labeled jar to snapshot
> > repo and tarballs to ~psteitz
>
> In order for (5) to be automated with
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3) Announce availability of RC, publish RC-labeled jar to snapshot
> repo and tarballs to ~psteitz
In order for (5) to be automated with the stage plugin, you would need
to stage each release in a separate repository. I
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Niall,
>
> not sure if I'm part of the gang but I will be there from Sunday to
> Friday ... :-)
Sorry, didn't respond earlier. I think anyone who shows the slightest
interest in commons is part of the gang - that
Ugh. Thanks for reminding me on this, Niall. I keep forgetting to do
this when I build a new box. Will fix these
Phil
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:52 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Author: psteitz
> > Date:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:52 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: psteitz
> Date: Sat Mar 22 15:52:54 2008
> New Revision: 640114
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=640114&view=rev
> Log:
> Modified LoadGenerator, ClientThread to support aggregation of custom
> statistics. Added
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 2/20/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyone planning to be at ApacheCon EU 2008?
> >
> > I'm going to be there - perhaps we could have an informal get together
> > if there are a few of us?
>
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First, thanks for helping move this along, Rahul. We need to at least
> get the "releasing" docs updated.
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Based on couple of JIRA comments
On 22/03/2008, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First, thanks for helping move this along, Rahul. We need to at least
> get the "releasing" docs updated.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Based on couple of JIRA comments, it seems there
First, thanks for helping move this along, Rahul. We need to at least
get the "releasing" docs updated.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Based on couple of JIRA comments, it seems there still isn't consensus
> about a release process using m2 at Commons
On 2/20/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone planning to be at ApacheCon EU 2008?
>
> I'm going to be there - perhaps we could have an informal get together
> if there are a few of us?
>
I'll be there Tuesday evening through Friday evening.
Folks, TODO:
I've proposed a BOF
On 3/22/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I haven't read all the text below, and I refuse to do so, until we can
> reach an agreement on a "vision" level.
>
FWIW, I think we are doing OK at that level. Atleast enough to make
progress on COMMONSSITE-{26,27}, which is my short t
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 1:56 PM, simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (b)
> maven-release-plugin checks that there are no SNAPSHOT versions in the
> pom.
>
> But isn't
> grep "SNAPSHOT" pom.xml
> simple enough? [1]
>
>
Perhaps we could use the enforcer plugin once it gets all the kinks
out?
What happened to the "vision" level that Rahul requested that we stay on?
This happens *every* time we get into discussions about the build or
release process. Instead of focusing on what we can agree upon people
start going into the nitty gritty details saying: I *don't* like this or
that det
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it
sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should
always use the release plugin. That will give us consistent releases.
Or co
On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 18:18 +0100, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> James Carman wrote:
> > On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it
> >> sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should
> >> alw
On 3/21/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it
> > sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should
> > always use the release plugin. Tha
On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it
> sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should
> always use the release plugin. That will give us consistent releases.
>
Or consistently not usi
I've been using CLI 1 for a while and I noticed that there's been renewed
interest in developing CLI2. I was wondering how people are currently using
CLI, and whether I'm using it properly?
Most of the command line apps that I've developed do more than one thing.
In order to make it easier to plu
James Carman wrote:
On 3/21/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If I raise my view and just look at the A, B, C and D headings, it
sounds good. But, there shouldn't be two options under B. IMO we should
always use the release plugin. That will give us consistent releases.
Should s
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Tobias Bocanegra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > My work practice will be to take a branch of Commons CLI using either
> > > Bazaar or Git -- I don't think Mercurial has proper Subversion support
> > > as yet, so is not an option. This will almost certainl
> > My work practice will be to take a branch of Commons CLI using either
> > Bazaar or Git -- I don't think Mercurial has proper Subversion support
> > as yet, so is not an option. This will almost certainly be a branch
> > without previous history to avoid having to process 639959 commit
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Russel Winder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Henri,
>
>
> On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 19:14 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> > We need to get the damn thing out. :)
>
> I think it is also worth having someone actively working on this who is
> part of the commit team.
De
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Tobias Bocanegra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > hi all,
> > > i'm working on a project that is using CLI2 for an interactive console
> > > application. To my understanding, CLI2 is not released nor is a
> > > snapshot available in the m2 repository. so i
Henri,
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 19:14 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote:
> We need to get the damn thing out. :)
I think it is also worth having someone actively working on this who is
part of the commit team. I appreciate there are zillions of trendy new
annotation-based packages, but there is a role fo
34 matches
Mail list logo
