I would like to release commons-parent and commons-sandbox-parent to
upgrade the commons-build-plugin to the new 1.3 version.
Changes since last commons-parent release:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/commons-parent/trunk/pom.xml?r1=935100&r2=923432&diff_format=h
commons-sandbox-paren
Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> This seems to ask a more general question and it is an important one:
> How to retire components that have releases?
>
> Do we want to settle this more generally, before we proceed with
> retiring this component?
I agree we should solve the general problem and I think t
Sebb, that's a good idea. Three categories seems important: sandbox,
active, retired.
I suppose Commons should agree what is a retired component: a
component without any release for 3 years?
2010/4/16 sebb:
> On 16/04/2010, Paul Benedict wrote:
>> We could also push the projects into the Apache
On 16/04/2010, Paul Benedict wrote:
> We could also push the projects into the Apache Attic.
However they are not strictly projects, but components of the Commons project.
Since there is still a Commons community, I think the Attic is unnecessary here.
But I agree with Niall that it would probab
This seems to ask a more general question and it is an important one:
How to retire components that have releases?
Do we want to settle this more generally, before we proceed with
retiring this component?
If so: How do we settle this? I am a little bit afraid that the
discussion leads to nothing
We could also push the projects into the Apache Attic.
2010/4/16 Niall Pemberton :
> 2010/4/5 Oliver Zeigermann :
>> Folks!
>>
>> The only discussion seems to be about "how to retire the project", not
>> "if to retire the project". This means to me we all agree to at least
>> temporarily retire it
2010/4/5 Oliver Zeigermann :
> Folks!
>
> The only discussion seems to be about "how to retire the project", not
> "if to retire the project". This means to me we all agree to at least
> temporarily retire it and there is no more discussion about how to do
> it.
>
> As the Apache commons way of ret
I have added a JIRA entry for the full retiring process now:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRANSACTION-39
2010/4/16 sebb :
> On 16/04/2010, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
>> 2010/4/16 sebb :
>>
>> >> > * Tempted to leave the SVN as is, but make it read-only; rather than
>> >> > do a move to
On 16/04/2010, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> 2010/4/16 sebb :
>
> >> > * Tempted to leave the SVN as is, but make it read-only; rather than
> >> > do a move to dormant/. I think we should avoid changing the svn
> >> > location of released components.
> >>
> >>
> >> I think the consensus more
2010/4/16 sebb :
>> > * Tempted to leave the SVN as is, but make it read-only; rather than
>> > do a move to dormant/. I think we should avoid changing the svn
>> > location of released components.
>>
>>
>> I think the consensus more or less was to move it into svn dormant, right?
>>
>> Can I s
On 16/04/2010, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> OK, so I have done some initial steps. Details are inline below:
>
> 2010/4/7 Henri Yandell :
>
> > * Definitely should update the website to explain that it's been
> > retired and why. I don't think this is a case of waiting for community
> > to show u
OK, so I have done some initial steps. Details are inline below:
2010/4/7 Henri Yandell :
> * Definitely should update the website to explain that it's been
> retired and why. I don't think this is a case of waiting for community
> to show up again (thus why I prefer retired to dormant), we're EOL
12 matches
Mail list logo
