Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=171165&projectId=161
Build statistics:
State: Ok
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Sat 21 Mar 2009 23:30:56 -0700
Finished at: Sat 21 Mar 2009 23:31:46 -0700
Total time: 49s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build Numbe
If we aren't going to release real soon is there any process for
publishing a SNAPSHOT? I have a bunch of stuff for Configuration I'd
really like to commit but I can't because Commons Configuration will
now have a dependency on Commons VFS 2.0-SNAPSHOT.
Ralph
On Mar 21, 2009, at 4:55 PM, J
Joerg, did you run the Maven build after you made these changes?
SubnodeConfiguration wouldn't compile (I fixed that). Also, now one of
the unit tests is failing - although I can't be completely sure it is
due to the changes you made.
Hi, Matt.
Thanks for your interest and opinion.
As you said, this is food for thought. Honestly I think that Robust-Task is
suitable for Commons rather than incubator for going to TLP. As you
mentioned, however, I am worrying about I don`t have 'commit authority' when
it goes to sandbox.
So, I`d
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=170901&projectId=161
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Sat 21 Mar 2009 18:31:41 -0700
Finished at: Sat 21 Mar 2009 18:31:55 -0700
Total time: 14s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build Numbe
Sergey Vladimirov wrote:
> Personally, I would like to see some issues to be resolved before 2.0
> release, because they can create incompatibility with previous releases in
> some way.
> - VFS-169 is the example of such issue (changing default behavior of
> toString() to use friendly URI)
this i
Personally, I would like to see some issues to be resolved before 2.0
release, because they can create incompatibility with previous releases in
some way.
- VFS-169 is the example of such issue (changing default behavior of
toString() to use friendly URI)
- VFS-203 (if it's going to be fixed at all
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> cli2 tonight.
>
> JIRA admin work happened instead tonight. Reduced the Apache JIRA
> count by 1. cli2 somenight.
cli2 is now in the sandbox.
Website will be at: http://commons.apa
The classes that support abandoned connection cleanup in dbcp have been
deprecated for almost 6 years now. From the archives [1], it looks
like the decision to deprecate these classes was due to the consensus
among committers at that time that adding support for this in dbcp was a
bad idea an
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1885 details some of the reasons
> for
> adopting this. It sounds like it should simplify the RC/release process
> somewhat. WDYT?
I have successfully used it for RAT and it's a real simplificat
While we think over the Nexus issue, can anyone guide me in publishing
snapshots to the existing repo?
Thanks,
Matt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1885 details some of the reasons for
adopting this. It sounds like it should simplify the RC/release process
somewhat. WDYT?
-Matt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...
Speaking as a member of the Commons PMC, though not for the ENTIRE PMC: given
the comparisons between robust-task and [chain], maybe this could be a seed for
a [chain] rewrite/2.0 . Then you'd still have the question of sandbox grant
vs. incubation; the problem with the sandbox grant AIUI is
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Min Cha wrote:
> I wonder whether I am understanding a message from you.
> Do you think this project should or can be a component in Commons?
Could become...
> If so, I would like to know how to be a component in Commons.
Well, it depends. The Commons communit
Jörg Schaible schrieb:
Hi,
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi folks,
OK then, so don't be surprised if I start to commit. I will have to make
me familiar with the experimental branch first though.
Oliver Heger wrote:
I am fine with both points and also agree with the comments of Ralph.
1) sounds tha
15 matches
Mail list logo
