[CANCELLED][VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-04 Thread Mark Thomas
sebb wrote: >On 3 November 2013 19:55, Mark Thomas wrote: >> On 02/11/2013 23:36, Thomas Neidhart wrote: >> >> Thanks for the testing. >> >>> One minor thing: >>> >>> When publishing the site you will most likely encounter problems, as >the >>> pom is missing some configurations regarding the scm

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-04 Thread sebb
On 3 November 2013 19:55, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 02/11/2013 23:36, Thomas Neidhart wrote: > > Thanks for the testing. > >> One minor thing: >> >> When publishing the site you will most likely encounter problems, as the >> pom is missing some configurations regarding the scm publishing. >> >> Unle

[CANCELLED][VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 31/10/2013 15:02, Mark Thomas wrote: > Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP > bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significant API > changes in Pool so it is time for a release. While RC2 did gather enough votes for a release, folks also highli

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 02/11/2013 23:36, Thomas Neidhart wrote: Thanks for the testing. > One minor thing: > > When publishing the site you will most likely encounter problems, as the > pom is missing some configurations regarding the scm publishing. > > Unless you deliberately kept the componentid at 'pool', you

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 03/11/2013 16:59, Gary Gregory wrote: > Any reason we are using an old version of asm-util? We are using 4.0, the > current version is 4.2. I think because cglib cited 4.0 as a dependency. I'll update to 4.2 assuming all the tests still pass. Mark > > Gary > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 02/11/2013 22:41, Phil Steitz wrote: > 0) We forgot to specify required JDK level anywhere. Fixed in > trunk. If you regenerate release notes, this will be fixed. Will do. Thanks. > 1) The Ant build is broken due to cglib dependency. We should > either dump the Ant build or fix it. I don'

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/2/13 3:41 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/1/13 5:53 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> On 01/11/2013 12:27, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >>> Hello Mark, >>> >>> again building with: >> Thanks again for the testing. >> >>> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 >>> 17:22:22+0

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 02/11/2013 22:40, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP >> bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significant API >> changes in Pool so it is time for a release. >> >> The Pool 2.0 RC2

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 01/11/2013 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote: > +1 > > BUT: > > - We could use a migration guide, even if it just says "change the package > name from ...pool to pool2." I added some basic text to index.xml. We can expand it based on feedback. > - Not a blocker but should be addressed, from the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Mark Thomas
On 03/11/2013 16:56, Gary Gregory wrote: > BTW, why are we not using Java 6's LinkedBlockingDeque instead of our > custom LinkedBlockingDeque? http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1175092 Mark - To unsubscribe, e

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Gary Gregory
Any reason we are using an old version of asm-util? We are using 4.0, the current version is 4.2. Gary On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP > bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significa

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-03 Thread Gary Gregory
BTW, why are we not using Java 6's LinkedBlockingDeque instead of our custom LinkedBlockingDeque? Gary On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP > bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significa

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-02 Thread Thomas Neidhart
On 10/31/2013 04:02 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP > bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significant API > changes in Pool so it is time for a release. > > The Pool 2.0 RC2 is available for review here: > https:/

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-02 Thread Jörg Schaible
Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/1/13 5:53 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> On 01/11/2013 12:27, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >>> Hello Mark, >>> >>> again building with: >> Thanks again for the testing. >> >>> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 >>> 17:22:22+0200) >>> Maven home

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-02 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/1/13 5:53 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 01/11/2013 12:27, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> Hello Mark, >> >> again building with: > Thanks again for the testing. > >> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 >> 17:22:22+0200) >> Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apach

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-02 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Mark, Mark Thomas wrote: > Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP > bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significant API > changes in Pool so it is time for a release. > > The Pool 2.0 RC2 is available for review here: > https://dist.apache.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-01 Thread Gary Gregory
+1 BUT: - We could use a migration guide, even if it just says "change the package name from ...pool to pool2." - Not a blocker but should be addressed, from the RAT report: Unapproved licenses: src/site/resources/download_pool.cgi - Findbugs reports one MALICIOUS_CODE item, which we sh

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-01 Thread Mark Thomas
On 01/11/2013 12:27, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Mark, > > again building with: Thanks again for the testing. > > Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 > 17:22:22+0200) > Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apache-maven-3.1.1 > Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-11-01 Thread Benedikt Ritter
Hello Mark, again building with: Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 17:22:22+0200) Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apache-maven-3.1.1 Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_40.jdk/Contents/

[VOTE] Release Apache Commons Pool 2.0 RC2 as 2.0

2013-10-31 Thread Mark Thomas
Development on Pool 2 is complete and a review of the remaining DBCP bugs has not highlighted any that are likely to trigger significant API changes in Pool so it is time for a release. The Pool 2.0 RC2 is available for review here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/ (r3386)