On Jan 8, 2008 4:03 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I understand that there are branches for introducing Generics
> and other Java5 and Java6 features into both Commons Lang and
> Commons Collections (collections_jdk5_branch and LangTwo-1.x
> respectively). I'd like to see these release
OK looks like were nearly ready for IO 1.4 release - theres a minor
issue to resolve on IO-77[1] so that just leaves IO-137[2] to decide
whether we're going to do anything about for 1.4 or move it to
post-1.4 - Henri and Jukka expressed interest on IO-137 - do you guys
want to / have time to look a
On Jan 8, 2008 4:32 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2008 4:11 PM, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 8, 2008 3:11 AM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Jan 8, 2008 10:50 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 8, 20
Happy to move IO-137 over to post-1.4.
Hen
On Jan 9, 2008 1:04 AM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK looks like were nearly ready for IO 1.4 release - theres a minor
> issue to resolve on IO-77[1] so that just leaves IO-137[2] to decide
> whether we're going to do anything about for
> From: Phil Steitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:10 PM
>
> On Jan 7, 2008 8:02 PM, Gary Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello All:
> >
> > I've tested building and unit testing on a bunch of Java platforms [1] and
> > all
> looks well. If there is a specific
Hi,
On Jan 9, 2008 11:04 AM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Henri and Jukka expressed interest on IO-137 - do you guys
> want to / have time to look at this?
Let's move it to post-1.4. The reset() issue still needs some thought
and probably shouldn't be rushed.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-jaxme has an issue affecting its community
integration.
This
On Jan 8, 2008 7:55 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > On Jan 8, 2008 7:12 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Jan 8, 2008 6:49 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2008 4:19 PM, Joch
OK so now were down to agreeing the exception in IO-77 - once thats
done I can cut an RC.
I'm starting to think that with the javadoc.jar Notice/License issue I
may cut the rc with m1, since m2 seems to painful ATM (I've spent far
too much time battling with m2 recently).
Niall
On Jan 9, 2008 9:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 8, 2008 7:55 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 8, 2008 7:12 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 8, 2008 6:49 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 8, 2008 4:19 PM
Niall Pemberton wrote:
OK so now were down to agreeing the exception in IO-77 - once thats
done I can cut an RC.
I'm starting to think that with the javadoc.jar Notice/License issue I
may cut the rc with m1, since m2 seems to painful ATM (I've spent far
too much time battling with m2 recently).
On Jan 9, 2008 10:39 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks - shouldn't we do this in commons-parent pom though, not just for IO?
Yes, please!
--
Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So that you think before
you break 'em.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time)
-
On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > OK so now were down to agreeing the exception in IO-77 - once thats
> > done I can cut an RC.
> >
> > I'm starting to think that with the javadoc.jar Notice/License issue I
> > may cut the rc with m1, si
On 1/9/08, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 10:39 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks - shouldn't we do this in commons-parent pom though, not just for IO?
>
> Yes, please!
>
Makes sense to me as well.
-Rahul
---
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
OK so now were down to agreeing the exception in IO-77 - once thats
done I can cut an RC.
I'm starting to think that with the javadoc.jar Notice/License issue I
may cut the rc with
On 1/9/08, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=610444
> >
> > Thanks - shouldn't we do this in commons-parent pom though, not just for IO?
>
> No, not in my opinion. We've agreed to disagree on which way to go with
> this. There are two o
On Jan 9, 2008 11:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, not in my opinion. We've agreed to disagree on which way to go with
> this. There are two option, each with its merits and flaws.
>
> A) Use maven-remote-resources-plugin
> B) Keep manually edited files in SVN and copy them
On Jan 9, 2008 11:01 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > > On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > >>> OK so now were down t
On Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> >>> OK so now were down to agreeing the exception in IO-77 - once thats
> >>> done I can cut an RC.
> >>>
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 11:01 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Niall Pemberton wrote:
OK so now were down
On Jan 10, 2008 12:25 AM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 2008 11:01 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 4:41 PM
Hi,
I have prepared a third release candidate of commons-fileupload
1.2.1. A list of changes since rc2 and things that I haven't changes,
can be found below.
Thanks,
Jochen
[ ] +1
[ ] =0
[ ] -1
- The pom and jar files of commons-io 1.3.2 have been deployed
again to the m2 repository, this
I forgot to note: The distribution is available on
http://people.apache.org/~jochen/commons-fileupload/dist
The proposed site is at
http://people.apache.org/~jochen/commons-fileupload/site
Sorry,
Jochen
-
To unsubscri
+1 looks good to me - I guess this is a good advert for the
remote-resources-plugin, as the manfest looks OK :)
Niall
On Jan 10, 2008 2:14 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have prepared a third release candidate of commons-fileupload
> 1.2.1. A list of changes since rc2
On Jan 10, 2008 1:38 AM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 10, 2008 12:25 AM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > > On Jan 9, 2008 11:01 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> On Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMA
On Jan 10, 2008 4:37 AM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 looks good to me - I guess this is a good advert for the
> remote-resources-plugin, as the manfest looks OK :)
That was my impression too. :-)
--
Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So that you think before
you br
Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Jan 9, 2008 11:16 PM, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No, not in my opinion. We've agreed to disagree on which way to go with
> > this. There are two option, each with its merits and flaws.
> >
> > A) Use maven-remote-resource
On Jan 10, 2008 8:51 AM, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry to repeat myself again, but I really do not think the
> maven-remote-resources approach is
> even legal. IANAL, but as I understand things, we *must* not use this.
Simon,
I understand your concern to mean, that the NOTIC
28 matches
Mail list logo
