[Pool] Performance Tests for Pool-277

2014-09-19 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
Hello, re https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-277 I would like to commit VFS-277 fix (nonlockstats2.patch). However before I do that, I would like to test if it is really a perfomrmance improvement. Lucas confirms it helps in his scenario. I have run the included PerformanceTest, but the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Daemon 1.0.15 windows binary package with signed executables

2014-09-19 Thread Stefan Bodewig
+1 could see the signature on my Win7 VM and Windows seemed to like it. Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread sebb
On 19 September 2014 18:05, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 19/09/2014 17:24, sebb a écrit : > >> The source archive does not agree with SVN, as it is missing several files: That should have read: "missing several files, including:" >> >> LICENSE-header.txt >> checkstyle.xml >> docs/verifier/chap1.bm

[VOTE] Release Configuration 2.0-alpha1 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread Oliver Heger
Hi all, this is a vote for the first alpha version of [configuration] 2.0 based on the first release candidate. Please note the following points: - This release is according to the "release often and early" mantra. It is not yet perfect (e.g. there are lots of checkstyle errors, and it is expecte

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons Configuration - Apache Commons (Group (shared) Maven 3 Build Definition (Java 1.6))

2014-09-19 Thread Apache Continuum
Online report : https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=37019&projectId=72 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Fri 19 Sep 2014 20:20:19 + Finished at: Fri 19 Sep 2014 20:20:46 + Total time: 26s Build Trigger: Schedule

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 19/09/2014 17:24, sebb a écrit : > The source archive does not agree with SVN, as it is missing several files: > > LICENSE-header.txt > checkstyle.xml > docs/verifier/chap1.bmp > docs/verifier/chap1.eps Thank you for the review sebb. These files are not required to build the code, so I think

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread sebb
On 19 September 2014 00:14, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Hi all, > > The first release candidate of BCEL is ready to pass under your scrutiny. > > Tag: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/bcel/tags/BCEL_6_0_RC1/ > (r1621539) > > Release notes: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commo

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread Dave Brosius
+1 On 09/18/2014 08:44 PM, sebb wrote: On 19 September 2014 00:14, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Hi all, The first release candidate of BCEL is ready to pass under your scrutiny. Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/bcel/tags/BCEL_6_0_RC1/ (r1621539) Release notes: https://dist.apache

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Daemon 1.0.15 windows binary package with signed executables

2014-09-19 Thread sebb
On 19 September 2014 10:13, Mark Thomas wrote: > Ping. > > This vote has been open for more than 72 hours and has only attracted > one binding PMC vote. > > Please could I ask folks, and PMC members in particular, to take a look > at this. It should be an easy vote since the binary is almost ident

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

2014-09-19 Thread sebb
On 19 September 2014 07:01, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 19/09/2014 02:44, sebb a écrit : > >> [Either the rev or hashes are needed in the vote e-mail so the final >> released artifacts can be traced back to the vote if necessary] > > Can we keep the release process simple please? The last time we >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Daemon 1.0.15 windows binary package with signed executables

2014-09-19 Thread Mark Thomas
Ping. This vote has been open for more than 72 hours and has only attracted one binding PMC vote. Please could I ask folks, and PMC members in particular, to take a look at this. It should be an easy vote since the binary is almost identical to the 1.0.15 binary already released. Cheers, Mark