You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> on 2003/03/07 09:02:15 UTC
1.5.3?
Hi,
as I feared, the zip refactorings have introduced a (at least one)
nasty bug. I think 17648 is serious enough to warrant a 1.5.3 release
rather soon. We might get a chance to look into the new FTP issue at
the same time.
Thoughts?
Stefan
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Christopher Lenz <cm...@gmx.de>.
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003, Christopher Lenz <cm...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>>I can reproduce this using 1.5.2, while 1.5.1 doesn't expose the
>>problem.
>>
>>Is this the same issue?
>
> Probably yes. The Gump run of 2003-03-08 should produce valid zips
> (even for WinZIP) if it is.
Yep, the issue seems fixed with this Gump run!
--
Christopher Lenz
/=/ cmlenz at gmx.de
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 07 Mar 2003, Christopher Lenz <cm...@gmx.de> wrote:
> I can reproduce this using 1.5.2, while 1.5.1 doesn't expose the
> problem.
>
> Is this the same issue?
Probably yes. The Gump run of 2003-03-08 should produce valid zips
(even for WinZIP) if it is.
Stefan
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Christopher Lenz <cm...@gmx.de>.
Hi Stefan,
I think this bug is causing the Gump-built ZIPs of Jakarta-Cactus to get
corrupted in such a way that at least WinZip cannot handle them:
http://cvs.apache.org/builds/jakarta-cactus/nightly/
I can reproduce this using 1.5.2, while 1.5.1 doesn't expose the problem.
Is this the same issue?
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as I feared, the zip refactorings have introduced a (at least one)
> nasty bug. I think 17648 is serious enough to warrant a 1.5.3 release
> rather soon. We might get a chance to look into the new FTP issue at
> the same time.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Stefan
--
Christopher Lenz
/=/ cmlenz at gmx.de
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>
wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:28 pm, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
>> So far it is hard to recommend switching to 1.5.2.
>
> Should we pull it, then?
Might be better, I'm not sure.
> As for timeframe, how about monday week for 1.5.3 Beta 1?
Fine with me (I'll merge the zip patch over today, but we need
confirmation that the WinZIP issue is fixed with that).
Stefan
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:28 pm, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> Not too long. So far it is hard to recommend switching to 1.5.2.
>
Should we pull it, then?
> > Should we limit 1.5 branch changes to these fixes to avoid
> > introducing other issues?
>
> I think so.
>
OK, agreed. As for timeframe, how about monday week for 1.5.3 Beta 1?
Thoughts?
Conor
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>
wrote:
> There is also a junit version issue which we should address.
I think this isn't real.
> although only releases seem to bring issues out :-).
Yes, unfortunately. 8-(
If only Christopher had told us of the Cactus problem earlier ;-)
> The question, I think, is how long do we wait to shake out any other
> issues?
Not too long. So far it is hard to recommend switching to 1.5.2.
> Should we limit 1.5 branch changes to these fixes to avoid
> introducing other issues?
I think so.
Stefan
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 07:02 pm, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as I feared, the zip refactorings have introduced a (at least one)
> nasty bug. I think 17648 is serious enough to warrant a 1.5.3 release
> rather soon. We might get a chance to look into the new FTP issue at
> the same time.
>
> Thoughts?
>
There is also a junit version issue which we should address. So, I think 1.5.3
is a goer. Perhaps the beta period was too short - although only releases
seem to bring issues out :-).
The question, I think, is how long do we wait to shake out any other issues?
Should we limit 1.5 branch changes to these fixes to avoid introducing other
issues?
Conor
Re: 1.5.3?
Posted by Erik Hatcher <ja...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
+1 - the <zip> issue is serious enough to warrant it. I haven't looked
into the <ftp> issue, but the report seemed to indicate a regression
bug.
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 03:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as I feared, the zip refactorings have introduced a (at least one)
> nasty bug. I think 17648 is serious enough to warrant a 1.5.3 release
> rather soon. We might get a chance to look into the new FTP issue at
> the same time.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>