http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang-3.0-beta-1/site/apidocs/index.html
But I'll update the website a bit so it's easy to find when I republish.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> If you haven't already, can you publish the beta-1 API before the vote?
>
> On Thu, Ju
If you haven't already, can you publish the beta-1 API before the vote?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Just let me know when everything is resolved and I can repeat :)
>
>
Just let me know when everything is resolved and I can repeat :)
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:13 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> Henri,
>
> Since I srewed everything up (artifactId, EventListenerSupport, etc.),
> do you want me to re-cut the 3.0-beta release? I think we should try
> to make sure all thi
Ok, it's already changed in trunk. If we come up with a good reason
to change it back, we can do so easily.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> +1 too.
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> I was -1, but the below is a good argument. +1.
>>
>> On Thu
+1 too.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I was -1, but the below is a good argument. +1.
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:08 PM, James Carman
> wrote:
> > Well, I think changing the artifactId right now would be the way to
> > go. That keeps things consistent. If we move
That's "screwed" not "srewed"
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:13 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> Henri,
>
> Since I srewed everything up (artifactId, EventListenerSupport, etc.),
> do you want me to re-cut the 3.0-beta release? I think we should try
> to make sure all this is fixed before we "release" a bet
Henri,
Since I srewed everything up (artifactId, EventListenerSupport, etc.),
do you want me to re-cut the 3.0-beta release? I think we should try
to make sure all this is fixed before we "release" a beta.
James
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I was -1, but the below is
I was -1, but the below is a good argument. +1.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:08 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> Well, I think changing the artifactId right now would be the way to
> go. That keeps things consistent. If we move to org.apache.commons
> groupId now and don't change the artifactId and then
Well, I think changing the artifactId right now would be the way to
go. That keeps things consistent. If we move to org.apache.commons
groupId now and don't change the artifactId and then later, if we
release 4.x, we change the package to lang4 and the artifactId to
commons-lang4 it will just be
We don't need the artifact name to necessarily contain the version name
since the group is different. We already have achieved parallel installs
just by doing that.
I see two choices for the FQN:
org.apache.commons:commons-lang3:3.0-beta-1
org.apache.commons:commons-lang:3.0-beta-1
Which do you f
Yes, it's
org.apache.commons:commons-lang3
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> And we have abandoned commons-lang as the groupId, right?
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:57 PM, James Carman
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, just wanted to make sure I wasn't off base here. Want me to
>> commi
On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:00 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> And we have abandoned commons-lang as the groupId, right?
>
Correct.
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:57 PM, James Carman
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, just wanted to make sure I wasn't off base here. Want me to
>> commit it (it's change on my local)?
>>
>
And we have abandoned commons-lang as the groupId, right?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:57 PM, James Carman wrote:
> Ok, just wanted to make sure I wasn't off base here. Want me to
> commit it (it's change on my local)?
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Paul Benedict
> wrote:
> > +1. One goal th
Ok, just wanted to make sure I wasn't off base here. Want me to
commit it (it's change on my local)?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> +1. One goal that Henri and I believed in is side-by-side / casual migration
> of code. You can't do that with the same artifactId.
>
> On
+1. One goal that Henri and I believed in is side-by-side / casual migration
of code. You can't do that with the same artifactId.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:50 PM, James Carman wrote:
> All,
>
> Changing the package name helps, but I think we need to also change
> the artifactId so that when folks
15 matches
Mail list logo
