I really worried about if our repos can even runs in a same jvm(I mean
normally, not osgi or shading)
Maybe a commons-bom repo and monthly release be useful? Gary what do you
think?
Hello Xeno,
Please start a new thread with your proposal.
Gary
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025, 08:10 Xeno Amess wrote:
> btw I just got an idea, is it meaningful to make a commons-bom or
> something?
> I really worried about if our repos can even runs in a same jvm(I mean
> normally, not osgi or shading
btw I just got an idea, is it meaningful to make a commons-bom or something?
I really worried about if our repos can even runs in a same jvm(I mean
normally, not osgi or shading)
Maybe a commons-bom repo and monthly release be useful? Gary what do you
think?
Xeno Amess 于2025年2月10日周一 21:08写道：
> >
> This is different Emanuel, Dependabot did in fact do all the work. I don't
think we would suggest not giving authorship if a person did the work. That
work is extremely valuable IMO, especially considering the OS x Java
version matrix.
Gary, root of the problem is as I described before, you and
This is different Emanuel, Dependabot did in fact do all the work. I don't
think we would suggest not giving authorship if a person did the work. That
work is extremely valuable IMO, especially considering the OS x Java
version matrix.
Gary
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025, 05:34 Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> On
I think the idea of "celebration" is antiquated here, I see this as a label
that reflects the same idea that git has with the split of "author" and
"committer". In this case "dev" is the committer and "thanks" is the author.
Gary
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025, 05:25 Arnout Engelen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1
Knowing that Dependabot did the work should tell you that all builds were
green in the GH CI matrix (unless one commits a bump when a red build
exists in the matrix, it's happened before).
The alternative is that you have no idea what a dev did to validate an
upgrade (unless the commit comment say
> Gotcha, I didn't realize different commons- components had different ways
of working here, sorry about that.
yes. Gillis tends to remain on old versions of dependencies, and worries
about people using old versions dependency cannot upgrade to new versions
of commons-lib.
so Gillis and math libs
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:45 AM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Le lun. 10 févr. 2025 à 11:25, Arnout Engelen a
> écrit :
> > Do you mean we should leave out the whole line or just the "Thanks to
> > Dependabot" part?
>
> The whole line.
>
> > I tried to follow the convention from other Commons projec
> +1, otherwise we may also thank Git, IntelliJ and OpenJDK for every
release :)
git yes.
jdk half half because I also donated my time for it(though not very much hours).
for jetbrains, no, I paid already.
Xeno Amess
From: Emmanuel Bourg
Sent: Monday, February 10
> > I don't that it is useful (IMHO, it is even harmful if it is littered
> > with hardly
> > informative automated messages that drown functional changes).
> > Fine if there is an easy and safe way to update a dependency, but
> > should we thank a robot?
> >
>
> Do you mean we should leave out the
Hi Arnout,
On 10.02.2025 11:24, Arnout Engelen wrote:
That doesn't seem easy to automate,
though, and I'd say we don't want to add additional steps to the release
process either.
It is possible to automate (see [1] for example), but it requires a
workflow to run as `pull-request-target`. Alte
Hi.
Le lun. 10 févr. 2025 à 11:25, Arnout Engelen a écrit :
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 10:21 AM Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>
> > The commit below will generate a line in the release notes that says
> > "Thanks to Dependabot".
> >
>
> It generates a line that says "Bump org.apache.commons:commons-
On 10/02/2025 10:20, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hi.
The commit below will generate a line in the release notes that says
"Thanks to Dependabot".
I don't that it is useful (IMHO, it is even harmful if it is littered
with hardly
informative automated messages that drown functional changes).
Fine if th
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 10:21 AM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> The commit below will generate a line in the release notes that says
> "Thanks to Dependabot".
>
It generates a line that says "Bump org.apache.commons:commons-rng-bom from
1.5 to 1.6 #244 Thanks to Dependabot.".
> I don't that it is us
Le lun. 10 févr. 2025 à 10:31, Xeno Amess a écrit :
>
> thank is free imo...
It's not when it actually obscures the information.
> a free thank for a free bot, sounds fair to me...
It's not "fair" wrt all the other much more useful tools that we use to build
our software but is not celebrated e
btw I bet Gary would say yes to the thank, he really loves that bot lol
Xeno Amess 于2025年2月10日周一 17:31写道：
> thank is free imo...
> a free thank for a free bot, sounds fair to me...
>
> Xeno Amess
> --
> *From:* Gilles Sadowski
> *Sent:* Monday, February 10, 2025 5:20
thank is free imo...
a free thank for a free bot, sounds fair to me...
Xeno Amess
From: Gilles Sadowski
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2025 5:20:53 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: [All] Useless update of "changes.xml"
Hi.
The commit below will generate a li
Hi.
The commit below will generate a line in the release notes that says
"Thanks to Dependabot".
I don't that it is useful (IMHO, it is even harmful if it is littered
with hardly
informative automated messages that drown functional changes).
Fine if there is an easy and safe way to update a depend
19 matches
Mail list logo
