The vote for releasing Commons VFS 2.0 has passed with the following binding +1
votes:
Oliver Heger
Luc Maisonobe
Phil Steitz
Ralph Goers
In addition, a formal abstain was received from Sebb.
Thanks to all who participated in the vote and gave their feedback. I will
start the release procedure
If someone else wants to post the vote results while I'm in the air I'm fine
with that too.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 21, 2011, at 11:31 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I'm traveling today and will post the vote results when I arrive at my
> destination later tonight.
>
> The package name change
I'm traveling today and will post the vote results when I arrive at my
destination later tonight.
The package name change was discussed last November at which time I was
instructed to change them.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 21, 2011, at 11:10 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Without the package n
Without the package name change, would it be a drop in replacement?
Aside from changes for providers that is. I am wondering what this
would look like for clients only.
Gary
On Aug 21, 2011, at 8:33, sebb wrote:
> On 18 August 2011 17:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> This is a vote to release Apache
On 18 August 2011 17:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Changes made since the last candidate:
>
> * Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
> * Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
> in
None were blockers btw.
The only really important one is:
>> Mention the package name change on the frontpage. Also that this means
>> you can run both versions side by side.
>
> Did you read the News section? Isn't that clear?
And the answer there is nope, didn't see it. Eyes weren't working. :
On 20 August 2011 21:54, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
>
> On the website:
>
> This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
> (pretty much):
>
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/site/commons-vfs2-examples/index.html
>
> Clir
Notes below.
On Aug 20, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
>
> On the website:
>
> This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
> (pretty much):
>
>
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/site/commons-vfs2-examp
I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
On the website:
This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
(pretty much):
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/site/commons-vfs2-examples/index.html
Clirr reports would be nice to show the API change. You'll have t
On 8/18/11 9:25 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Changes made since the last candidate:
>
> * Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
> * Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
> instruc
Le 18/08/2011 18:25, Ralph Goers a écrit :
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
* Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
instructions.
+1
All points I mentioned for the last RC have been addressed. Everything
looks good!
Oliver
Am 18.08.2011 18:25, schrieb Ralph Goers:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the we
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
* Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
instructions.
I have also removed files that shouldn't be
On 18 August 2011 01:09, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2011, at 3:27 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
>> wrote:
>>> I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
>>> it from the web site.
>>
>> But then surely source archiv
On Aug 17, 2011, at 3:27 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
> wrote:
>> I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
>> it from the web site.
>
> But then surely source archive builds will fail?
Yeah. I'll have to think about th
On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
wrote:
> I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
> it from the web site.
But then surely source archive builds will fail?
> Ralph
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 17 August 2011 20:43
I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
it from the web site.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 20:43, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
> wrote:
> > The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was
> there
>
I didn't check, but for some reason I assumed that once I do a "close" that
I wouldn't be able to delete anything. But you are correct. I can do that so
I will as it is easier.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:51 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 20:55, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
> wrote:
>
On 17 August 2011 20:55, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
wrote:
> Nope. That is my mistake. Maven generated them when it uploaded them to the
> Nexus staging repo. But I deleted that since we don't deliver them from
> there. I then uploaded the artifacts from where they were built on my
> machine to
On 17 August 2011 20:43, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
wrote:
> The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
> long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
> and moved it to core. The only real description is on the web site under
> "File Sy
Sorry, yes.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 17/08/2011 22:13, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com a écrit :
>
> OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the
>> README
>> in a few hours after I get home from work and send out another release
>> v
Le 17/08/2011 22:13, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com a écrit :
OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the README
in a few hours after I get home from work and send out another release vote.
Was this vote offocially cancelled ?
Luc
In the meantime, if there are any othe
OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the README
in a few hours after I get home from work and send out another release vote.
In the meantime, if there are any other problems that should be corrected
I'd appreciate the feedback.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:05 PM, P
On 8/17/11 12:43 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com wrote:
> The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
> long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
> and moved it to core. The only real description is on the web site under
> "File Systems
Nope. That is my mistake. Maven generated them when it uploaded them to the
Nexus staging repo. But I deleted that since we don't deliver them from
there. I then uploaded the artifacts from where they were built on my
machine to the directory on people.a.o rather than grabbing them from Nexus,
whi
On 8/17/11 12:45 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Build is now successful under Windows 7 with Java 1.5 and 1.6.
> Artifacts and site look good.
>
> The only thing I am missing are md5 files. Are they required
> (other components used to have them)? If not, you can count my +1.
The md5s are required and
Build is now successful under Windows 7 with Java 1.5 and 1.6. Artifacts
and site look good.
The only thing I am missing are md5 files. Are they required (other
components used to have them)? If not, you can count my +1.
Oliver
Am 17.08.2011 07:44, schrieb Ralph Goers:
This is a vote to rel
The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
and moved it to core. The only real description is on the web site under
"File Systems" where it says they under in development (not by me :-) ).
Non
On 8/17/11 11:32 AM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com wrote:
> What do you mean "It did not work"? This is a multi-project site so in
> general mvn site is useless. You have to run mvn site:stage-deply
> -DstagingSiteURL="file url where I want the site to go". I suppose I could
> add that to the read
Commons parent has both a "release" profile and an "apache-release" profile.
The apache-release profile is used by the release plugin as it is set up for
the ASF. I'm not sure what value-add (or value loss) the "release" profile
provides.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:12 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.c
The Maven release plugin uses the apache-release profile which is set up in
the apache parent pom.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:49 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 19:37, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
> wrote:
> > Oh - and if for some non-obvious reason you want to create the
> distributi
On 17 August 2011 19:37, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
wrote:
> Oh - and if for some non-obvious reason you want to create the distribution
> jars when you do the build you can run
>
> mvn -P apache-release clean install.
I though commons normally use their own release profile, which is -Prelease ?
Oh - and if for some non-obvious reason you want to create the distribution
jars when you do the build you can run
mvn -P apache-release clean install.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:35 AM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com <
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> Oops. That should be mvn site:stage-deploy.
Oops. That should be mvn site:stage-deploy.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:32 AM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com <
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> What do you mean "It did not work"? This is a multi-project site so in
> general mvn site is useless. You have to run mvn site:stage-deply
> -D
What do you mean "It did not work"? This is a multi-project site so in
general mvn site is useless. You have to run mvn site:stage-deply
-DstagingSiteURL="file url where I want the site to go". I suppose I could
add that to the readme, but it is documented pretty well on the maven site
plugin we
Hi All:
I am not sure if I am building correctly, but here is what I found. Some
build instructions in the readme.txt file would help.
Downloaded source zip from
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/staged/
>From the root I ran "mvn site" which did not work. Fine, starting to poke
around
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Fixed the manifest error that was causing the build to fail.
* Changed the copyright date in the Notice file from 2010 to 2011.
* Removed the references to javamail from the Notice file.
* Removed all the
On 14 August 2011 18:49, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2011, at 10:09 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> Thanks, Sebb. See below.
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
>>>
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to re
On Aug 14, 2011, at 10:09 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> Thanks, Sebb. See below.
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the las
On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Thanks, Sebb. See below.
>
> On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>>>
>>> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2
Thanks, Sebb. See below.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>>
>> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
>> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
> incompatible API change were addressed. Most in
My mistake then.
Gary
On Aug 14, 2011, at 12:28, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Why? The source has a dist directory with a pom.xml in it. I thought the
> source zip was supposed to capture what was tagged?
>
> Ralph
>
> On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> FWIW, the source zip has a
Interesting. That is the same error that Continuum reported. I have no idea
what it is and can't seem reproduce it on my MacBook. I will give it a try on
Ubuntu.
The surefire report will look strange. This is a multi-module project. You need
to go to the "Core" component to see real reports.
R
Why? The source has a dist directory with a pom.xml in it. I thought the
source zip was supposed to capture what was tagged?
Ralph
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> FWIW, the source zip has a dist folder with a pom.xml in it. Not a
> blocker but should be fixed.
>
> Gary
>
On 14 August 2011 17:09, Gary Gregory wrote:
> FWIW, the source zip has a dist folder with a pom.xml in it. Not a
> blocker but should be fixed.
I think that's intentional - it's the distribution module, which is also in SVN.
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>>
When building the source distribution I get the following error:
Tests run: 975, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
[INFO] [jar:jar {execution: default-jar}]
[INFO]
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO]
Yes.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:07 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>>
>> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
>> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a poss
FWIW, the source zip has a dist folder with a pom.xml in it. Not a
blocker but should be fixed.
Gary
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
> of the
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
> incompatible API change were addressed. Most in
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many of
the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly incompatible
API change were addressed. Most instances of StringBuffer were replaced with
StringBui
On Dec 23, 2010, at 12:11 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>
>
> But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
>>> IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
>>> directly from maven has ever met my expectations in terms
On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>>
>>> But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
>> IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
>> directly from maven has ever met my expectations in terms of formatting
>> and
>> conten
On 22 December 2010 07:43, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
>>> > >> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM,
Hi,
Phil Steitz wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
>> > > >wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goe
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers
> >> wrote
> >> >
> >> >> I have not i
On Dec 21, 2010, at 18:49, "sebb" wrote:
> On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
>>>
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers
>>> wrote
> I have not included re
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
>>
>> > On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers
>> wrote
>> >
>> >> I have not included release notes in the src zip since my understanding
>> is
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers
> wrote
> >
> >> I have not included release notes in the src zip since my understanding
> is the src zip should contain the directories pretty much as the
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers wrote
>
>> I have not included release notes in the src zip since my understanding is
>> the src zip should contain the directories pretty much as they exist in SVN.
>> Instead I have added a README.txt that te
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I have modified the release packaging so that the binary release includes
> release notes generated by the maven-changes-plugin announcement generator.
> I've excluded doap_vfs.rdf from the src zip, although it isn't clear to me
> why this is neces
I have modified the release packaging so that the binary release includes
release notes generated by the maven-changes-plugin announcement generator.
I've excluded doap_vfs.rdf from the src zip, although it isn't clear to me why
this is necessary, especially if there is some Maven plugin designe
On Dec 6, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi Ralph:
>
> While the src distro ran the Maven test goal OK for me on Vista + Java 6, I
> see that no tests ran (0% success rate) according to
> http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/surefire-report.html
>
> How can that be?
>
>
VF
On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:49, "sebb" wrote:
> On 6 December 2010 02:04, Ralph Goers wrote:
>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>>
>> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
>> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
On 6 December 2010 02:04, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
> incompatible API change were addressed. Most i
st
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
>
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
> of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
> incompatible API change
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many of
the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly incompatible
API change were addressed. Most instances of StringBuffer were replaced with
StringBui
-Message d'origine-
De : Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 4 novembre 2010 00:23
À : Commons Developers List
Objet : [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[
Subject: Re: Backwards incompatible changes and package names (was: Re:
>> [VOTE]
>> Release Commons VFS 2.0)
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> > I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making
>> > it 1.x
Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>>
>> Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
>> requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
>> LargeTarTestCase has been added to the tes
: [VOTE]
> Release Commons VFS 2.0)
>
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making
> > it 1.x if there are no compat breaks.
> >
>
> So, how about now that we know there are compat
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:49 PM, James Carman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
>> FileSystem abstraction.
>> http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/nio/file/package-summary.html.
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
> FileSystem abstraction.
> http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/nio/file/package-summary.html.
> I would think VFS 3.0 would remove the API and just pro
I'd say that Java7 is still at least 12 months out and another 6-12
months to general adoption.
-h
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 17:41, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Nov 7, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
>
>> I would suggest that we (and in fact I started hacking around with
>> this) relea
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> If this is rushing I'd hate to see slow. Releasing VFS 2.0 has been discussed
> several times over the last year or more. None of this is new information.
>
Rushing as in doing something before it's time to do it, not rushing
as in doing somet
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:18 PM, James Carman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>>
>> Is the goal to never do a release?
>>
>
> No, the goal is to not rush a release just to get something out there.
> If we will be knowingly setting our users up for failure (or worse
>
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> Is the goal to never do a release?
>
No, the goal is to not rush a release just to get something out there.
If we will be knowingly setting our users up for failure (or worse
"jar hell"), then I don't want to do a release that way.
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/7/10 8:19 PM, James Carman wrote:
>> So you think that if there is no API break, then you don't bump major
>> version numbers? So what about vfs 2.0? Would you vote against it?
>
> I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM t
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making
> it 1.x if there are no compat breaks.
>
So, how about now that we know there are compat breaks? I would -1
the release now that we know the API is in fact "broken" b
Gregory<
ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com>
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:
henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that "
On Nov 7, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
> I would suggest that we (and in fact I started hacking around with
> this) release a vfs2 which is Java6+ only and fully generified.
>
I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
FileSystem abstraction.
ht
Ok, so change package, artifactid (group has already changed), and take the
opportunity to modernize the API unless you can do it in a compatible way in
a later 2.x release. Otherwise you will need to go to 3.x.
On Nov 7, 2010 8:21 PM, "sebb" wrote:
> I've just run Clirr on VFS 2.0 (had to cheat
I've just run Clirr on VFS 2.0 (had to cheat and change the Maven
GroupId). There are quite a few errors, which mean that the code is
not binary compatible:
ERROR: 7012: org.apache.commons.vfs.FileContent: Method 'public
boolean hasAttribute(java.lang.String)' has been added to an interface
ERROR:
at 8:37, "Henning Schmiedehausen"<
>>>>>>> henn...@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would suggest that we (and in fact I started hacking around with
>>>>>>>>> this) rele
...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that "has warnings" is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them
later.
Yes, release earl
t;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's fine with me and my current work projects but I like a more
>>>>> iterative process where we can generify the code on java 5 for a 2.1. Then
>>>>> we can do a java 6 release.
>>>>>>
>>&
ts but I like a more
>>>> iterative process where we can generify the code on java 5 for a 2.1. Then
>>>> we can do a java 6 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -h
>>>>>>
>>>>
release.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> -h
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 08:22, Gary Gregory
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 7, 2010, at 7:45, "sebb" wrote:
>>>>>>
t;> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 08:22, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 7, 2010, at 7:45, "sebb" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7 November 2010 02:17, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> -Original Message-
>
Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 08:22, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 7, 2010, at 7:45, "sebb" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7 November 2010 02:17, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-
>>>>>>> From: Henni
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
>>>>>> To: Commons Developers List
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
>>>>>>
>>>>
y Gregory wrote:
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
>>>>> To: Commons Developers List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE]
7, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
>>>> To: Commons Developers List
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
s Developers List
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> - I don't think that "has warnings" is a problem
>>> - If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them later.
>>
>
On 7 November 2010 02:17, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
>
> +1
>
> - I don't think that "has warnings
+1
- I don't think that "has warnings" is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them later.
-h
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 13:12, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.
On 5 November 2010 20:12, Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
> requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
> LargeTarTestCase has been added to the test-da
Ralph Goers wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
>
> Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
> requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
> LargeTarTestCase has been added to the test-data directory, greatly
> imp
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
