Mark Fortner wrote:
There was some discussion during the last release about a NIO-compatible
version of VFS. This raised a few questions in my mind.
1. Is there a branch where this work should start?
This is easy enough to create one if there's desire :)
2. Are there any specific
+1 Congrats!
Sergio Fernández wrote:
congrats, Stian!
On May 25, 2016 6:11 PM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote:
Done - now live on
http://commons.apache.org/team-list.html
Do I need to do something special to get Jira admin access? (e.g. to
manage Versions)
On 24 May 2016 at 20:20, Gary Grego
+1 wfm
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Hello,
I would like to be able to use Git with the Apache Commons VFS repo. As
we agreed upon I call out the intention to do this and ask you for your
oppinion.
Now that we have the 2.1 release out of the way the switch wont affect
any planned steps.
Anybody oppo
sebb wrote:
On 22 May 2016 at 03:54, Josh Elser wrote:
> It's not a problem, it's an inconvenience.
>
> Ideally, Maven builds the artifacts with the intended names. This creates
> consistency through every VOTE message, xsum/sig verification automation,
> website
t works for Accumulo only because we explicitly attach it to the
module with the desired artifactId.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:49 PM Josh Elser wrote:
Overriding the finalName is what I was assuming I'd need to change, but
thanks for the extra context, Christopher.
At least I know where I ca
ze why it's done that way. Perhaps something like that might be
needed here, since this is in a similar multi-module situation.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:36 AM sebb wrote:
On 20 May 2016 at 15:39, Josh Elser wrote:
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
Josh Elser schrieb am Fr
The Apache Commons team is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Commons VFS 2.1. Apache Commons VFS provides a single API for accessing
various different file systems. It presents a uniform view of the files
from various different sources, such as the files on local disk, on an
HTTP server
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
Josh Elser schrieb am Fr., 20. Mai 2016 um 05:28 Uhr:
> One more (final?) snafu: turns out I used the "wrong" name for the
> artifacts in dist.a.o which caused the website to have the wrong links.
>
> Just corrected that,
me help (I knew what needed to be done already, but, obviously, I
didn't do it quite right on my own).
I plan to send out the ANNOUNCE as soon as I see most of the mirrors are
updated again.
- Josh
sebb wrote:
On 19 May 2016 at 18:43, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 19 May 2016
Thanks, Benedikt!
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
sebb schrieb am Do., 19. Mai 2016 um 10:55 Uhr:
On 19 May 2016 at 03:14, Josh Elser wrote:
Hi all,
Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and
release) were both updated, trunk was bumped to 2.2-SNAPSHOT
sebb wrote:
On 19 May 2016 at 03:14, Josh Elser wrote:
Hi all,
Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and
release) were both updated, trunk was bumped to 2.2-SNAPSHOT, nexus repo was
released, reporter.a.o was updated, and the svn tag was renamed. I did
It&#
No worries! Hope you had a great vacation. :)
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
Good work, and awesome you made it through our release process :-)
sorry I wasn't able to vote on this RC. I've been on vacation last week.
BR,
Benedikt
Josh Elser schrieb am Mi., 18. Mai 2016 um
Hi all,
Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and
release) were both updated, trunk was bumped to 2.2-SNAPSHOT, nexus repo
was released, reporter.a.o was updated, and the svn tag was renamed. I
did remove the checksums on the signatures before promoting the Nexus
and find some docs on the steps to promote these
artifacts (with the concerns acknowledged that were mentioned during the
vote).
- Josh
Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repo
17:57, Bernd wrote:
Hello,
Thanks Josh!
This is a binding +1
(however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another
RC or before releasing the repo):
2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
ine, but if you use the
sandbox profile,
via `mvn -Pinclude-sandbox verify`, things fall over because the above
mentioned module
is missing.
[4]:
everything properly checks out, but the format of the md5 file was different
for the artifacts in
dist.apache compared to repository.apache.
On 2016-05
Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
I'll ask on dev@jackrabbit to be sure.
>
> Agreed - so I've tracked it ashttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-611
>
> Could you assign it to me so I can mark it as In Progress?
Tried, but cannot find you as an assign target.
BTW, there is a sibling file
.
I assume Josh Elser (as the Release Manager for this candidate) will
formally mark the 2.1 RC2 thread as [CANCELLED] and then we can
prepare a new RC3 for voting.
..but be aware that many Apache committers have been involved with
ApacheCon which just finished last Friday, so folks probably have
+cc busbey (in case he misses this discuss, otherwise)
Does this make sense to you? I'm sure you have a better understanding
than I do at the fringes of licensing @ the ASF :)
tl;dr Those copied files from jackrabbit were added after the code was
already graduated from Incubator, thus, the or
g.
[4]:
everything properly checks out, but the format of the md5 file was different
for the artifacts in
dist.apache compared to repository.apache.
On 2016-05-11 20:29, Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
Maven repository:
https
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1166
Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ r13608
MD5 commons-vfs-distribution-2.1-bin.tar.gz
8cc35a3169e
sebb wrote:
On 11 May 2016 at 15:49, Josh Elser wrote:
> Well, I'd ask that you tell me what you think is wrong in what currently
> exists. I did what you asked for rc1 already, but apparently you still find
> it insufficient?
The RN section which mentioned the compatibil
s are not BC errors.
I don't have time just now, but I may be able to update them later today.
On 11 May 2016 at 05:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
Don't despair, I plan on being +1 for the next RC :-)
Gary
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
Well, this seems to have official
es for the next RC. Will try to get rc2 out in the next day
or two.
Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc1).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1163
Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repo
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
- The name is different from Release 1.0. It has been vfs-1.0, no it is
> commons-vfs-project-2.1. I think we should stick with the convention
> established with v1.0.
>
I've looked at the tag names again. It looks completely mixed up. We have:
vfs-1.0/
commons-vfs2-pr
ime tomorrow morning to have a look.
Benedikt
Josh Elser schrieb am Fr., 6. Mai 2016 um 16:24 Uhr:
Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding
votes.
**PMC, please vote.**
(Thanks to Stian for the nonbinding vote)
Consider the vote extended another 48hrs.
On May 3, 2
he low-hanging fruit changes I wrote
about plus updates to the latest Commons Net and IO IIRC (on my phone now).
I would like a new RC to pick up these changes, see my other email(s).
Gary
On May 8, 2016 11:50 AM, "Josh Elser" wrote:
Gary -- how quickly can you turn around a patch t
il-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201605.mbox/%3CCACZkXPy2R2m-95yme4J8ZbRQVtj%3DHaEZ7LncR7aU_QYAVt3UCA%40mail.gmail.com%3E
Thank you,
Gary
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
thank you for pushing this release. Sorry I haven't voted yet. I will have
First, let me express my gratitude to Stian Soiland-Reyes for
RM'ing a
release, I'm sure he did not know what he was getting himself into!
;-)
Huh? ... that was/is Josh Elser.
Who does (also) deserve many thanks.
Part of me writing this here is flushing out for myself, voters,
and
ca
he was getting himself into!
;-)
Huh? ... that was/is Josh Elser.
Who does (also) deserve many thanks.
Part of me writing this here is flushing out for myself, voters, and
casual
observers what it is we are doing ;-)
We have BC breakage in VFS 2.1 RC1 in two areas:
- Adding methods to
Gary Gregory wrote:
Some of the versions of jars in this page are out of date.
Why not refer to the generated page:
https://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/dependency-management.html
from the "About" page and other places if any?
+1
Thanks Gary! Will keep an eye out.
Gary Gregory wrote:
Sorry, quite busy this week, I'll try to take a look later today or this
weekend.
Gary
On May 6, 2016 7:24 AM, "Josh Elser" wrote:
Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding votes.
**PMC, ple
Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding votes.
**PMC, please vote.**
(Thanks to Stian for the nonbinding vote)
Consider the vote extended another 48hrs.
On May 3, 2016 11:43 PM, "Josh Elser" wrote:
> All,
>
> Please consider the following
On May 6, 2016 2:45 AM, "Jörg Schaible" wrote:
>
> Hi Josh,
>
> Josh Elser wrote:
>
> > Jörg Schaible wrote:
> >> Jörg Schaible wrote:
> >>
> >>> > Hi Josh,
> >>> >
> >>> > Josh Elser wrote:
> >
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> Josh Elser wrote:
>
>> Oh, well then! No pressure:)
>>
>> I'll have to find some time to re-read all of the conversation between
>> Jörg and Stian, but my initial reaction is the same as
t VFS 2.0 wasn’t verified
against this many different Java implementations and versions. Of course, the
more testing the better!
I will try to inspect the release and vote on it this evening.
Ralph
On May 4, 2016, at 9:43 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
Thanks for investigating and sharing your findings, J
] [Help 1]
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/DependencyResolutionException
[ERROR]
[ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resume the build with the
command
[ERROR] mvn -rf :commons-vfs2
= %< ==
The reason is an invalid (transitive)
sebb wrote:
On 5 May 2016 at 05:49, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
Have a look at the scripts in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/scripts/
I used those for VALIDATOR and NET.
Cool. Thanks for sharing. It would be good if the generic commons release
documents referenced these if they
sebb wrote:
On 5 May 2016 at 17:08, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I really don’t know why you are making such a big deal about this.
Because it's important that tags are immutable, and to to a lesser
degree to avoid creating spurious snapshot builds.
Yeah, it's ultimately so that I avoid having to
' RMs.
On 4 May 2016 at 04:43, Josh Elser wrote:
Here's what I've been doing. The generic instructions are woefully
incomplete (before someone chimes in again - no, not just because "VFS is a
multi-module project"). I think I have this on point for rc1, so I'm writin
ebug logging.
[ERROR]
[ERROR] For more information about the errors and possible solutions, please
read the following articles:
[ERROR] [Help 1]
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/DependencyResolutionException
[ERROR]
[ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resume the build with th
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Am Tue, 03 May 2016 21:47:43 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser:
See the original point of me starting this thread: it was stated that
the sandbox (might) depend on code which is not licensed in such a
manner that is allowed for ASF projects.
Which is why it is not built or
Here's what I've been doing. The generic instructions are woefully
incomplete (before someone chimes in again - no, not just because "VFS
is a multi-module project"). I think I have this on point for rc1, so
I'm writing it down here before I forget (we can figure out where it
*should* go later)
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc1).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1163
Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ r13511
MD5 commons-vfs-distribution-2.1-bin.tar.gz
1192914d
Don't thank me yet, we haven't gotten the release out ;)
Gary Gregory wrote:
Thanks for RM'ing Josh! We're long overdue for a VFS release.
Gary
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
This vote fails with one -1 and nothing else.
Going to be trying to
This vote fails with one -1 and nothing else.
Going to be trying to roll an rc1 with the feedback given so far.
Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories
for release (beside we do not want to?)
I dont think we should burden such structural and long standing changes
onto a voluntary release manager given the 2.0 had the same structure.
Gruss
Bernd
Am Tue, 3 May 2016 15:55:00 +0100
schrieb sebb:
On 3 May 2016 at 01:43, Josh Elser wrote
sebb wrote:
> mvn site:stage is used expressly for this purpose. Maven has no problems
> with properly constructed multi-module projects -- it's a fallacy that Maven
> cannot handle multi-module projects well.
[Since Maven knows it is a multi-module project it should not need a
different com
sebb wrote:
>> Ideally the duplicate archives should be dropped, but that is not a
>> blocker, just a nuisance when reviewing.
>
>
> Yeah, I'll try to figure out what's going on with that when I roll rc1. I'm
> not sure since it's not pulling directly from the apache.pom (I'm not sure
> wha
sebb wrote:
+1 along with someone to own this and do the proper diligence as a PMC
> member to make sure that we're violating policy.
It would be easy to_ensure_ a violation ... !
Since sandbox is not ready for release, for the purpose of getting a
VFS release out it should be moved to a bra
sebb wrote:
> Sebb -- would addressing these points in the release notes cause you to
> change your -1 to a +1? I'd like to make all the changes I can ASAP and roll
> the next RC. Because I haven't said it explicitly -- thanks for taking the
> time to give all of the feedback that you have al
sebb wrote:
On 3 May 2016 at 01:43, Josh Elser wrote:
Binaries are not an official release anyways.
But that does not mean they can include software that is incompatible
with the AL, because end users expect (and we tell them) that the
software comes under AL 2.0.
I didn't mean to
Binaries are not an official release anyways.
Even so, that seems like a *very* scary thing to even have this code
checked into the repository if it depends on incompatibly-licensed
software. Am I misunderstanding this?
e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
Agree, the sandbox profile should
Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 2 May 2016 at 15:00, Josh Elser wrote:
> Also, please re-read the end of the previous thread on compatibility.
>
> I clearly stated that there were some changes which I consider not
worth
> changing about the TarArchiveEntry code. If you feel like t
pport the sandbox components. They might have
been included in the source distribution though. But these emails make it sound
like it is exactly the opposite of what I would have expected.
Ralph
On May 2, 2016, at 6:35 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
The "Download and Build" page i
Thanks Benedikt!
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Josh,
Josh Elser schrieb am So., 1. Mai 2016 um 21:46 Uhr:
Can someone grant me some karma on the VFS project, please? I'll
eventually need to some version management, but, even now, it seems like
I can't assign an issue to myself.
sebb wrote:
http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/index.html
mentions Release Notes but the link points to
https://archive.apache.org/dist/commons/vfs/RELEASE_NOTES.txt
which of course is for2.0.
It would be helpful to use the current release notes on the site.
Ok, I'll have
sebb wrote:
On 2 May 2016 at 15:00, Josh Elser wrote:
> Also, please re-read the end of the previous thread on compatibility.
>
> I clearly stated that there were some changes which I consider not worth
> changing about the TarArchiveEntry code. If you feel like these are not
&
on how the changes should be addressed.
Josh Elser wrote:
Sebb -- did you actually read the changes?
You should note that those are all method additions which we already
decided were allowed
sebb wrote:
I have now found the Clirr Report at
http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs
sebb wrote:
The "Download and Build" page is more suitable for developers than end
users (especially if it points to trunk, which is not voted on) so
should not be the primary download page.
Also there seem to be two identical copies of each of the non-Maven
release artifacts:
commons-vfs-2.1-bi
Josh Elser wrote:
Sebb wrote:
> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1
(rc0).
>
> Maven repository:
>
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161
The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release items as the above
URL i
(So sorry, fingers sent too quick)
commons-vfs-2.1-bin.tar.gz:
MD5 fdaad280f3d3c592df048a58bfa8debd
SHA1 edfa8ac8c31e2e4b88898ac2418f9e7a7fe34324
commons-vfs-2.1-bin.zip:
MD5 951448d632ff37363c4bd0dcad3a887e
SHA1 2fd9262d349f6d62eb34912a7d56d406b7655568
My GPG key is 4677D66C
Josh Elser wrote
Forgot to include xsum/sig info:
commons-vfs-2.1-src.tar.gz:
MD5 f768cf5f2d00cfa58b70d221054ca1c9
SHA1 d5a53ecf575e961b2e6b472e8bf5b013b33bfa78
commons-vfs-2.1-src.zip:
MD5 2eb6a10883b77ce137a391a7dd341120
SHA1 f831eb7cb62df295ef8b1a090e209550c6ea5c35
Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider
them?
On 2 May 2016 at 10:40, sebb wrote:
On 2 May 2016 at 05:28, Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161
The e-mail should contain the hashes
copies of each of the non-Maven
release artifacts:
commons-vfs-2.1-bin
and
commons-vfs2-distribution-2.1-bin
etc.
Are they supposed to be the same? If not what is missing from one of them?
On 2 May 2016 at 10:40, sebb wrote:
On 2 May 2016 at 05:28, Josh Elser wrote:
All,
Please consider the
Sebb wrote:
> Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0).
>
> Maven repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161
The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release items as the above
URL is transitory.
The hashes allow o
All,
Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0).
Maven repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161
Artifacts:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/{binaries,source}
Staged site:
http://home.apache.org/~els
Can someone grant me some karma on the VFS project, please? I'll
eventually need to some version management, but, even now, it seems like
I can't assign an issue to myself.
Thanks in advance.
- Josh
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Also, looks like I'm wrong about the static member moving up to a parent
class (WebdavFileProvider to HttpFileProvider). I thought this wouldn't
work, but a quick experiment shows that it's fine.
Josh Elser wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-377 is the biggest
n
to check, but if BC can be achieved then it
reduces the downstream effort needed.
On 30 April 2016 at 00:00, Josh Elser wrote:
So, just call 2.1 instead 3.0? Fine by me.
Package name becomes o.a.c.vfs3? ArtifactId becomes (variants of)
commons-vfs3? Please confirm, Gary.
I don't thi
e release.
So... the least risky option is (2), which is a 0-risk option.
Gary
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
Hah, thanks for the details, Ralph. I will be sure to bring myself up to
speed.
That being said: I would still like to get some consensus from those who
will be v
wrote:
On Apr 29, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
Ralph Goers wrote:
On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:27 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elserwrote:
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser wrote:
How does changing the package name help? Doesn&#
Ralph Goers wrote:
On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:27 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elserwrote:
How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a
NoClassDefFound error inste
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elser wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser wrote:
How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a
NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing implementation for a new
method?
That means we c
sebb wrote:
On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser wrote:
> How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a
> NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing implementation for a new
> method?
That means we change ALL the package names and the Maven coords.
Ef
Thanks, sebb. That did the trick.
sebb wrote:
Try again.
I added you to the commons unix group
On 29 April 2016 at 05:03, Josh Elser wrote:
Can someone add my key to
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/commons/KEYS, please? It would
appear that I lack the required karma.
Thanks in
How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a
NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing implementation for a new
method?
Where do you all define what is public API (and thus what is stated to
be stable)?
Gary Gregory wrote:
We have 2 choices IMO: document breaks or c
(working copy)
@@ -5520,3 +5520,100 @@
EaWfWeQZ4Q==
=b8+3
-END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
+
+pub 4096R/4677D66C 2013-05-04
+uid Josh Elser (Apache)
+sig 34677D66C 2016-04-06 Josh Elser (Apache)
+uid Josh Elser
+sig 34677D66C 2013-05-04
It looks like there are about 7 areas in core/ where compatibility
against 2.0 has been broken:
* Methods added to o.a.c.v.{FileContent,FileName,FileObject}
* Method added to o.a.c.v.RandomAccessContent
* Parameters changed on method(s) in
o.a.c.v.p.{b.Bzip2FileObject,g.GzipFileObject}
* Chang
Ok, ran into my first issue. Seems like I don't have the karma to edit
the existing JIRA issues (changing the fixVersion). Can someone please
add me to the appropriate role for the project?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubsc
Bernd
Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:01 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser mailto:els...@apache.org>>:
> Thanks Matt and Gary.
>
> I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also
applies
> to commons-*. Thanks for br
easier to just blow away the target directory and start
over than it is to revert stuff from scm.
Ralph
On Apr 27, 2016, at 8:31 AM, Josh Elser wrote:
Thanks, Sebb and Ralph.
I can dig through the parent poms. I wouldn't have initially realized that there was a
"commons" par
annoy the HDFS folks a bit)
So I can help you in case you need me to sponsor some changes (I
hope I have enough karma now).
We could even make a joined RC1, I am just not sure it wont open a
big chunk of additional work.
Gruss
Bernd
Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:01 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser:
Than
Hello,
see inline.
Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:05:01 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser:
Thanks for the great details, Bernd. Some questions/comments:
I hadn't even stumbled across VFS-570 due to its lack of
fixVersion=2.1. Are there more that need to be correctly tagged which
could potentially bloc
unk of additional work.
Gruss
Bernd
Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:01 -0400
schrieb Josh Elser:
Thanks Matt and Gary.
I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also applies
to commons-*. Thanks for bringing that up. Specifically though, I am
only interested in cutting a release
2.1.
Josh Elser wrote:
Thanks Matt and Gary.
I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also applies to
commons-*. Thanks for bringing that up. Specifically though, I am only
interested in cutting a release -- if we can get a new release cut that
we can use downstream, that increases
feel
free to create JIRAs, fix bugs and so on.
There might be some karma issues with a non-PMC member performing a
release, and I think we just went through this (sorry, I'm in settling in a
new house, not much time to dig in the ML archives).
Does anyone recall?
Gary
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016
Hi all,
There are presently 171 resolved issues sitting in commons-vfs2
2.1-SNAPSHOT, with 4 outstanding (none of which look like blockers to me).
The lack of any release of commons-vfs2 in years has been a big problem
downstream. This past weekend, I was again annoyed by bugs that have
been
88 matches
Mail list logo
