You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org> on 2014/10/26 19:18:33 UTC
Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
I have checked the branch 2.4.x. I have put back in the branch every thing that was obvious enough.
There are some that may need to be merged back too, I would need some feedback about them.
- IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
- use https for maven repos [3]; should we merge it ?
- and there is IVY-1491 [4]; should we merge it ?
- and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug: ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
Nicolas
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1465
[2] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=3076802a
[3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=750dbb84
[4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1491
[5] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=5063d256
[6] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=a6b9ca3f
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Josh Suereth <jo...@gmail.com>.
Awesome! Thanks guys.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org
> wrote:
> I applied the fix for IVY-1452, and to be safer than sorry I also applied
> the one for IVY-1493.
>
> For IVY-1474, as I commented there, I would prefer to have some
> documentation about it.
>
> Nicolas
>
> Le 27 oct. 2014 à 17:44, Josh Suereth <jo...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > Ivy-1452 has my vote. We had to backport that to ivy 2.3 for sbt
> > On Oct 26, 2014 3:30 PM, "Jean-Louis Boudart" <
> jeanlouis.boudart@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 2014-10-26 20:19 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org
> >:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
> >>>>> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
> >>>>>
> >>>> This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you
> >>> mean
> >>>> by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
> >>>
> >>> I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to
> >>> admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
> >>>
> >>> So IVY-1465 is finished ? Should we mark it as fixed in 2.4 ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any
> bug:
> >>>>> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
> >>>>>
> >>>> They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
> >>>> introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those
> >> one
> >>>> but i can create one if you want.
> >>>
> >>> Agreed, no need to create issues for that. My point is that since they
> >> are
> >>> not associated with any bug, I guess they should not be merged ? But if
> >>> these improvements are related to the API introduced in 2.4, then I
> guess
> >>> they should ?
> >>>
> >> They should be merged.
> >>
> >>
> >> What about including the two following ones ? :
> >>
> >> - IVY-1452 NullPointerException when accessing charset to invalid URL
> >> [1]
> >> - IVY-1474 Bintray resolver [2]
> >>
> >> IVY-1452 is anoying issue that could easily be fixed, i tried the
> attached
> >> patch and it fixes the issue.
> >> IVY-1474 is new resolver for Bintray repository.
> >>
> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1452
> >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1474
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>.
I applied the fix for IVY-1452, and to be safer than sorry I also applied the one for IVY-1493.
For IVY-1474, as I commented there, I would prefer to have some documentation about it.
Nicolas
Le 27 oct. 2014 à 17:44, Josh Suereth <jo...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Ivy-1452 has my vote. We had to backport that to ivy 2.3 for sbt
> On Oct 26, 2014 3:30 PM, "Jean-Louis Boudart" <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 2014-10-26 20:19 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
>>>>> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
>>>>>
>>>> This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you
>>> mean
>>>> by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
>>>
>>> I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to
>>> admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
>>>
>>> So IVY-1465 is finished ? Should we mark it as fixed in 2.4 ?
>>>
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug:
>>>>> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
>>>>>
>>>> They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
>>>> introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those
>> one
>>>> but i can create one if you want.
>>>
>>> Agreed, no need to create issues for that. My point is that since they
>> are
>>> not associated with any bug, I guess they should not be merged ? But if
>>> these improvements are related to the API introduced in 2.4, then I guess
>>> they should ?
>>>
>> They should be merged.
>>
>>
>> What about including the two following ones ? :
>>
>> - IVY-1452 NullPointerException when accessing charset to invalid URL
>> [1]
>> - IVY-1474 Bintray resolver [2]
>>
>> IVY-1452 is anoying issue that could easily be fixed, i tried the attached
>> patch and it fixes the issue.
>> IVY-1474 is new resolver for Bintray repository.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1452
>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1474
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Josh Suereth <jo...@gmail.com>.
Ivy-1452 has my vote. We had to backport that to ivy 2.3 for sbt
On Oct 26, 2014 3:30 PM, "Jean-Louis Boudart" <je...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2014-10-26 20:19 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>
> >
> >
> > >> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
> > >> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
> > >>
> > > This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you
> > mean
> > > by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
> >
> > I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to
> > admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
> >
> > So IVY-1465 is finished ? Should we mark it as fixed in 2.4 ?
> >
>
> Yes
>
>
>
> > >> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug:
> > >> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
> > >>
> > > They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
> > > introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those
> one
> > > but i can create one if you want.
> >
> > Agreed, no need to create issues for that. My point is that since they
> are
> > not associated with any bug, I guess they should not be merged ? But if
> > these improvements are related to the API introduced in 2.4, then I guess
> > they should ?
> >
> They should be merged.
>
>
> What about including the two following ones ? :
>
> - IVY-1452 NullPointerException when accessing charset to invalid URL
> [1]
> - IVY-1474 Bintray resolver [2]
>
> IVY-1452 is anoying issue that could easily be fixed, i tried the attached
> patch and it fixes the issue.
> IVY-1474 is new resolver for Bintray repository.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1452
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1474
>
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com>.
2014-10-26 20:19 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>
>
> >> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
> >> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
> >>
> > This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you
> mean
> > by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
>
> I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to
> admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
>
> So IVY-1465 is finished ? Should we mark it as fixed in 2.4 ?
>
Yes
> >> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug:
> >> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
> >>
> > They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
> > introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those one
> > but i can create one if you want.
>
> Agreed, no need to create issues for that. My point is that since they are
> not associated with any bug, I guess they should not be merged ? But if
> these improvements are related to the API introduced in 2.4, then I guess
> they should ?
>
They should be merged.
What about including the two following ones ? :
- IVY-1452 NullPointerException when accessing charset to invalid URL
[1]
- IVY-1474 Bintray resolver [2]
IVY-1452 is anoying issue that could easily be fixed, i tried the attached
patch and it fixes the issue.
IVY-1474 is new resolver for Bintray repository.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1452
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-1474
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com>.
Ok for me to make the next 2.4 from master.
2014-10-27 23:56 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>
> Le 26 oct. 2014 à 20:19, Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org> a
> écrit :
>
> >
> > Le 26 oct. 2014 à 19:58, Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
> >
> >> Hi Nicolas,
> >>
> >> My answers bellow.
> >>
> >> 2014-10-26 19:18 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org
> >:
> >>
> >>> I have checked the branch 2.4.x. I have put back in the branch every
> thing
> >>> that was obvious enough.
> >>>
> >>> There are some that may need to be merged back too, I would need some
> >>> feedback about them.
> >>>
> >>> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
> >>> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
> >>>
> >> This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you
> mean
> >> by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
> >
> > I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to
> admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
>
> So I had a closer look to it. Something is actually going wrong, git is
> right about the patch not applying cleanly, some code is missing.
>
> As far as I could look around, 3076802a [1] needs 8d851390 (r1592624) [2].
> It was supposed to be merged by 57892b6e [3] but it doesn’t look as fully
> merged. For instance, PomModuleDescriptorBuilder is modified by 8d851390
> but not by 57892b6e.
>
> So I don’t trust much the state the 2.4.x branch. Maybe should we better
> make the next 2.4 from trunk ?
>
> Nicolas
>
> [1]
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=3076802a
> [2]
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=8d851390
> [3]
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=57892b6e
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>
--
Jean Louis Boudart
Independent consultant
Apache EasyAnt commiter http://ant.apache.org/easyant/
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>.
Le 26 oct. 2014 à 20:19, Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org> a écrit :
>
> Le 26 oct. 2014 à 19:58, Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> My answers bellow.
>>
>> 2014-10-26 19:18 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>>
>>> I have checked the branch 2.4.x. I have put back in the branch every thing
>>> that was obvious enough.
>>>
>>> There are some that may need to be merged back too, I would need some
>>> feedback about them.
>>>
>>> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
>>> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
>>>
>> This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you mean
>> by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
>
> I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
So I had a closer look to it. Something is actually going wrong, git is right about the patch not applying cleanly, some code is missing.
As far as I could look around, 3076802a [1] needs 8d851390 (r1592624) [2]. It was supposed to be merged by 57892b6e [3] but it doesn’t look as fully merged. For instance, PomModuleDescriptorBuilder is modified by 8d851390 but not by 57892b6e.
So I don’t trust much the state the 2.4.x branch. Maybe should we better make the next 2.4 from trunk ?
Nicolas
[1] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=3076802a
[2] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=8d851390
[3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ant-ivy.git;a=commit;h=57892b6e
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>.
Le 26 oct. 2014 à 19:58, Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> My answers bellow.
>
> 2014-10-26 19:18 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
>
>> I have checked the branch 2.4.x. I have put back in the branch every thing
>> that was obvious enough.
>>
>> There are some that may need to be merged back too, I would need some
>> feedback about them.
>>
>> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
>> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
>>
> This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you mean
> by "doesn't apply cleanly » ?
I did a cherry-pick and there were some conflict to resolve. I have to admit that I didn’t looked at what the conflict was.
So IVY-1465 is finished ? Should we mark it as fixed in 2.4 ?
> - use https for maven repos [3]; should we merge it ?
>> - and there is IVY-1491 [4]; should we merge it ?
>>
> I would say yes for both
ok
>> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug:
>> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
>>
> They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
> introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those one
> but i can create one if you want.
Agreed, no need to create issues for that. My point is that since they are not associated with any bug, I guess they should not be merged ? But if these improvements are related to the API introduced in 2.4, then I guess they should ?
Nicolas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
Re: Commit Candidates for Ivy 2.4.x
Posted by Jean-Louis Boudart <je...@gmail.com>.
Hi Nicolas,
My answers bellow.
2014-10-26 19:18 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>:
> I have checked the branch 2.4.x. I have put back in the branch every thing
> that was obvious enough.
>
> There are some that may need to be merged back too, I would need some
> feedback about them.
>
> - IVY-1465 [1] doesn’t seem to be fully finished. One part is in the
> branch, the commit ‘3076802a’ [2] is not, and doesn’t apply cleanly.
>
This commit looks like easy to merge manually, by the way what do you mean
by "doesn't apply cleanly" ?
- use https for maven repos [3]; should we merge it ?
> - and there is IVY-1491 [4]; should we merge it ?
>
I would say yes for both
> - and there are two commits which don’t seem to be related to any bug:
> ‘5063d256’ [5] and ‘a6b9ca3f’ [6].
>
They are not related to any bug, both are small improvement on API
introduced in 2.4-rc1. Not sure it make sense to have a bug for those one
but i can create one if you want.