Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

Bo, Don't forget the tip from paul: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=incubator-general&m=116577422312412&w=2 Basically review what the Qpid guys did for the JMS disclaimers and add the same for JAX-WS and JSR-181 thanks, -- dims On 12/11/06, Bozhong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alright, t

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

Alright, then I think we should just not distribute the javadoc jars for now. Given that its in Bo's directory, I can't delete them and he's undoubtedly asleep for a few more hours :-). OK, I just woke up and the javadoc jars distribution are removed now. Cheers, Bo -

Re: Deploying Incubator Maven Artifacts [was Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)]

On Thursday 07 December 2006 19:59, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Dec 7, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: > > I must be missing something. If they aren't voted on, how do you know > > if they're valid and meet release requirements? > > It is impossible to verify that in a binary. We have to t

Re: Deploying Incubator Maven Artifacts [was Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)]

On Dec 7, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I must be missing something. If they aren't voted on, how do you know if they're valid and meet release requirements? It is impossible to verify that in a binary. We have to trust the person building it to do so according to an approved script.

Re: Deploying Incubator Maven Artifacts [was Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)]

I must be missing something. If they aren't voted on, how do you know if they're valid and meet release requirements? On 12/7/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Dec 7, 2006, at 3:00 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: > On 12/7/06, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I would say for

Re: Deploying Incubator Maven Artifacts [was Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)]

On Dec 7, 2006, at 3:00 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: On 12/7/06, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would say for now we just remove that jar if it's needed. However, how did the servicemix and other projects votes pass if it's a requirement? Is this another "new requirement in the mi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On Thursday 07 December 2006 17:59, robert burrell donkin wrote: > On 12/7/06, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thursday 07 December 2006 17:12, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-cxf-2.0-M1-v2/repository/org/a > > >pach e/cxf/cxf-api/2.0-incuba

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On 12/7/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 12/7/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As opposed to cutting a new release completely, can we choose one/any of the > follow options and get your +1? > 1. Not distribute the javadoc jar > 2. Recut just that jar after fi

Deploying Incubator Maven Artifacts [was Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)]

On 12/7/06, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would say for now we just remove that jar if it's needed. However, how did the servicemix and other projects votes pass if it's a requirement? Is this another "new requirement in the middle of a vote" thing? *wonders the same thing* Addi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

Oh, forgot to say: Very big thanks for taking the time to look at the release and commenting on it. Those of you that are taking the time to look at stuff on projects you aren't a mentor on deserve a medal or something. VERY big thanks. Dan On Thursday 07 December 2006 17:48, Daniel Kulp

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On Thursday 07 December 2006 17:12, robert burrell donkin wrote: > On 12/4/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > (NOTE: we just started labelling the different releases as v1/v2/etc. > > While this is our 3rd attempt, the above says v2 as we just started > > counting in the directory nam

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On 12/7/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Robert, - questions - > > > http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-cxf-2.0-M1-v2/repository/org/apache/cxf/cxf-api/2.0-incubator-M1/cxf-api-2.0-incubator-M1-javadoc.jar > is missing license, disclaimer and notice files. it cannot therefo

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

Hi Robert, - questions - http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-cxf-2.0-M1-v2/repository/org/apache/cxf/cxf-api/2.0-incubator-M1/cxf-api-2.0-incubator-M1-javadoc.jar is missing license, disclaimer and notice files. it cannot therefore be distributed. planning to distribute this jar from a re

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On 12/4/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release which fixes the previous branding issues. As no one else seems to have found any other issues, we've cut a new build and published it here: Binaries and Source Distributions: http://people.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 from me On 12/6/06, Peter Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 03:51:48PM -0500, Dan Diephouse wrote: > [...] > > We ask that you please vote to approve this release: > > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 > [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide spe

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 03:51:48PM -0500, Dan Diephouse wrote: > [...] > > We ask that you please vote to approve this release: > > [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 > [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments) > +1 Cheers, Peter > Thanks for everyone wh

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

On Dec 4, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: We ask that you please vote to approve this release: [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments) +1 Looks good from an "administrative" aspect was well as a functional o

RE: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 > -Original Message- > From: Bozhong Lin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 1:03 AM > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org > Cc: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3) > > +1

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 Dan Diephouse wrote: The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release which fixes the previous branding issues. As no one else seems to have found any other issues, we've cut a new build and published it here: Binaries and Source Distributions: http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 Dan Diephouse wrote: The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release which fixes the previous branding issues. As no one else seems to have found any other issues, we've cut a new build and published it here: Binaries and Source Distributions: http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-c

RE: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 > -Original Message- > From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 3:52 PM > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3) > > The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate

RE: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 > -Original Message- > From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 04 December 2006 20:52 > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3) > > The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release which fixes the previous branding issues. As no one else seems to have found any other issues, we've cut a new build and published it here: Binaries and Source Distributions: http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-cxf-2.0-M1-v2/

RE: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+ 1 > -Original Message- > From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 4:52 AM > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3) > > > The Apache CXF team has cut another cand

RE: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 > -Original Message- > From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 4:52 AM > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3) > > > The Apache CXF team has cut another candida

Re: [VOTE] Apache Incubator CXF 2.0-M1 Release (RC 3)

+1 Dan Diephouse wrote: The Apache CXF team has cut another candidate release which fixes the previous branding issues. As no one else seems to have found any other issues, we've cut a new build and published it here: Binaries and Source Distributions: http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-