distributed by the download servers.
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
-Original Message-
From: Josh Elser
To: Commons Developers List
Sent: Di., 24 Mai 2016 4:20
Subject: Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1
sebb wrote:
> On 22 May 2016 at 03:54, Josh Elser wrote:
>> >
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 links, and dist.a.o files.
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 links, and dist.a.o files.
Does not follow, s
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 links, and dist.a.o files. Renaming them by hand
just makes things harder, IMO.
Ralph Goers w
Don’t you have to copy the files into the dist directory so you can commit
them? Why is renaming them during that step a problem?
Ralph
> On May 20, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Christopher wrote:
>
> Just keep in mind, that overriding the finalName only works for adjusting
> the local file name when it
Just keep in mind, that overriding the finalName only works for adjusting
the local file name when it's not attached to the build (in addition to the
directory name in an assembly). The final name is not used when it is
deployed to a Maven server or installed to the local repository. In those
cases
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 can look if I find the time to try to fix this
for the next sucker.. I mean release manager ;)
Christopher wrote:
I think we also had to override the fin
I think we also had to override the finalName in the root execution of
maven-assembly-plugin, so unpacking the source tarball wouldn't have a
directory called "accumulo-project-", and instead would look like
"accumulo-".
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:29 PM Christopher wrote:
> We had a similar probl
We had a similar problem in Accumulo. We wanted the artifact ID of our
tarballs to just be "accumulo". So our parent pom is now called
"accumulo-project", and one of the modules (that creates the tarballs) is
called just "accumulo".
This works for our -bin tarball (classifier: "bin" in the assembl
On 20 May 2016 at 15:39, Josh Elser wrote:
>
>
> 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 wron
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, sadly the website will continue
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, sadly the website will continue to be a little off
> for anoth
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, sadly the website will continue to be a little off
for another 24hrs. These are some more places that the docs could use
some help (I
On 19 May 2016 at 18:43, Josh Elser wrote:
> 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
>>> release
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, nexu
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's bette
If the next main release is going to be JDK7 & NIO focused, should there
not be a 3.0-SNAPSHOT branch as well?
On 19/05/2016 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, ne
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, nexus repo
> was
> > released, re
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's better to co
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
20 matches
Mail list logo
