Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 22:16, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit :
>
> On 05.06.19 14:12, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 20:54, Karl Heinz Marbaise a
> > écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have created an INFRA ticket, cause one module is stuck and for all
> >> builds whi
Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 21:52, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> first I don't understand why you really like to 1.0-alpha or somehting
> similar?
>
> Why not following semantical versioning and say if it's not yet 1.0.0
> than just simply release a 0.X.Y version. This makes clear the versio
On 05.06.19 14:12, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hello.
Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 20:54, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit :
Hi,
I have created an INFRA ticket, cause one module is stuck and for all
builds which blocks the whole build process..
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18546
Ticket has
Hi,
first I don't understand why you really like to 1.0-alpha or somehting
similar?
Why not following semantical versioning and say if it's not yet 1.0.0
than just simply release a 0.X.Y version. This makes clear the version
is not yet 1.0.0 and not finished and can be changed/break things..
Th
Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 15:46, sebb a écrit :
>
> On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 14:20, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 14:06, James Carman a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 7:36 AM sebb wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Huh?
> > > > That can still cause jar iss
Ping - any comment on the unexpected HEAD references?
Should they be changed?
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 15:15, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Did we git guru ourselves out of all of these?
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:39 AM sebb wrote:
>
> > I noticed that JCS still has a trunk branch and that ap
On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 14:20, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 14:06, James Carman a
> écrit :
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 7:36 AM sebb wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Huh?
> > > That can still cause jar issues, *precisely because* only one jar will
> > > reach the Java classpa
Hi.
Le dim. 9 juin 2019 à 14:06, James Carman a écrit :
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 7:36 AM sebb wrote:
>
> >
> > Huh?
> > That can still cause jar issues, *precisely because* only one jar will
> > reach the Java classpath.
> >
> > Suppose there is jar1 with API-V1.
> > This is depended on by app
On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 7:36 AM sebb wrote:
>
> Huh?
> That can still cause jar issues, *precisely because* only one jar will
> reach the Java classpath.
>
> Suppose there is jar1 with API-V1.
> This is depended on by app1 and app2.
>
> Then jar2 is produced with API-V2 (not BC-compatible with API
On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 12:01, James Carman wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 5:40 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> >
> > Ultimately the PMC still needs to vote on the release, no?
> > Hence I don't see what advantage there is in allowing different
> > beta policies. [Of course, no component is requi
On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 5:40 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Ultimately the PMC still needs to vote on the release, no?
> Hence I don't see what advantage there is in allowing different
> beta policies. [Of course, no component is required to provide
> a beta release...]
> What the proposal aims to
Hi.
Le jeu. 6 juin 2019 à 15:18, sebb a écrit :
>
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 23:40, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > Hi All:
> >
> > I see two lines of usage IRL from people:
> >
> > - I use whatever is "released" on Maven Central. I quote the word released
> > since that includes ANY artifacts, pre 1.0
12 matches
Mail list logo
