You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu> on 2008/10/27 23:43:09 UTC
[RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
It's been stalled for a while so it's time to JFDI.
The last 2 issues are resolved for 2.0.10, which had a combined 75
votes. I bumped the extension issue to 2.0.11 since it is complicated,
no patch yet and it's debatable if it's even worth fixing in 2.0.x.
Here's the list of issues fixed in 2.0.10:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14112&styleName
=Html&projectId=10500&Create=Create
And I've staged RC-1 here:
http://people.apache.org/~brianf/staging-repository/org/apache/maven/apa
che-maven/2.0.10-RC1/
Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
Thanks,
Brian
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Sure, I was just suggesting that things that used to work and now
don't, like this, are more important :)
On 29/10/2008, at 2:04 PM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
> ok brett,
>
> I'll try to create a testcase without seam.
>
> Even if we try to improve the quality of our releases I think we
> have to fix
> any issue that we find in 2.0.x in a bug fix and not only bugs we
> introduced
> in a bug fix release.
>
> From the beginning we should have apply only bugs fixes on 2.0.x and
> put
> changes (mirrors, ..) or new features (import scope, ...) in a new
> minor
> release (2.x).
>
> That's why I didn't check on which version it was a regression. It's
> just a
> bug in 2.0.x.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> I'll submit the IT in few days.
>
> Arnaud
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Arnaud,
>>
>> The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression
>> from
>> 2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't
>> rely
>> on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to
>> make a dep
>> change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a regression from
>> 2.0.9 ->
>> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed either for 2.0.10 or early
>> 2.0.11.
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>>
>> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
>>>
>>> annoying
>>> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>>>
>>>
>>> Arnaud
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
>>> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>>>
>>>>> 2.0.9.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>>>> things:
>>>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for
>>>> Brett but
>>>> not
>>>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>>>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a
>>>> proposed patch
>>>> and
>>>> the IT available.
>>>>
>>>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>>>> - MNG-3805
>>>> - MNG-3424
>>>> - MNG-3599
>>>> for 2.0.10.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Benjamin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ..........................................................
>>> Arnaud HERITIER
>>> ..........................................................
>>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>>> ..........................................................
>>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>>> ...........................................................
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@apache.org
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ..........................................................
> Arnaud HERITIER
> ..........................................................
> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
> ..........................................................
> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
> ...........................................................
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
Huh? The last attempt at 2.0.10 was months ago and this one was just
sitting around doing nothing ever since. The bandwagon gets too full
whenever it's release time and nothing happens in between, which is why
we introduced the process for the RC.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arnaud HERITIER [mailto:aheritier@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 10:15 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
I agree but I find the first RC was out quickly without giving the time
to
review the bugs we wanted to fix in this version.
It's not a big problem. We'll fix it in the .11. I'm preparing an IT.
Arnaud
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>
wrote:
> Arnaud, the idea is to limit the scope to new regressions once we
start an
> RC. Otherwise we would spin in circles forever.
>
> --Brian (mobile)
>
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2008, at 2:04 AM, "Arnaud HERITIER" <ah...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> ok brett,
>>
>> I'll try to create a testcase without seam.
>>
>> Even if we try to improve the quality of our releases I think we have
to
>> fix
>> any issue that we find in 2.0.x in a bug fix and not only bugs we
>> introduced
>> in a bug fix release.
>>
>> From the beginning we should have apply only bugs fixes on 2.0.x and
put
>> changes (mirrors, ..) or new features (import scope, ...) in a new
minor
>> release (2.x).
>>
>> That's why I didn't check on which version it was a regression. It's
just
>> a
>> bug in 2.0.x.
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
>>
>> I'll submit the IT in few days.
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
wrote:
>>
>> Hi Arnaud,
>>>
>>> The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression
from
>>> 2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't
rely
>>> on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to
make a
>>> dep
>>> change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a regression from
2.0.9
>>> ->
>>> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed either for 2.0.10 or early
>>> 2.0.11.
>>>
>>> - Brett
>>>
>>> On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>>>
>>> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more
than
>>>
>>>>
>>>> annoying
>>>> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Arnaud
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
>>>> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions
over
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.0.9.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to
stabilize
>>>>> things:
>>>>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for
Brett but
>>>>> not
>>>>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>>>>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a proposed
>>>>> patch
>>>>> and
>>>>> the IT available.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>>>>> - MNG-3805
>>>>> - MNG-3424
>>>>> - MNG-3599
>>>>> for 2.0.10.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Benjamin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> Arnaud HERITIER
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>>>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>>>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Brett Porter
>>> brett@apache.org
>>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>>
>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ..........................................................
>> Arnaud HERITIER
>> ..........................................................
>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>> ..........................................................
>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>> ...........................................................
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
..........................................................
Arnaud HERITIER
..........................................................
OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
..........................................................
ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
...........................................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>.
I agree but I find the first RC was out quickly without giving the time to
review the bugs we wanted to fix in this version.
It's not a big problem. We'll fix it in the .11. I'm preparing an IT.
Arnaud
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu> wrote:
> Arnaud, the idea is to limit the scope to new regressions once we start an
> RC. Otherwise we would spin in circles forever.
>
> --Brian (mobile)
>
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2008, at 2:04 AM, "Arnaud HERITIER" <ah...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> ok brett,
>>
>> I'll try to create a testcase without seam.
>>
>> Even if we try to improve the quality of our releases I think we have to
>> fix
>> any issue that we find in 2.0.x in a bug fix and not only bugs we
>> introduced
>> in a bug fix release.
>>
>> From the beginning we should have apply only bugs fixes on 2.0.x and put
>> changes (mirrors, ..) or new features (import scope, ...) in a new minor
>> release (2.x).
>>
>> That's why I didn't check on which version it was a regression. It's just
>> a
>> bug in 2.0.x.
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
>>
>> I'll submit the IT in few days.
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Arnaud,
>>>
>>> The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression from
>>> 2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't rely
>>> on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to make a
>>> dep
>>> change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a regression from 2.0.9
>>> ->
>>> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed either for 2.0.10 or early
>>> 2.0.11.
>>>
>>> - Brett
>>>
>>> On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>>>
>>> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
>>>
>>>>
>>>> annoying
>>>> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Arnaud
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
>>>> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.0.9.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>>>>> things:
>>>>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for Brett but
>>>>> not
>>>>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>>>>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a proposed
>>>>> patch
>>>>> and
>>>>> the IT available.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>>>>> - MNG-3805
>>>>> - MNG-3424
>>>>> - MNG-3599
>>>>> for 2.0.10.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Benjamin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> Arnaud HERITIER
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>>>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>>>> ..........................................................
>>>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>>>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>>>> ...........................................................
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Brett Porter
>>> brett@apache.org
>>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ..........................................................
>> Arnaud HERITIER
>> ..........................................................
>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>> ..........................................................
>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>> ...........................................................
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
..........................................................
Arnaud HERITIER
..........................................................
OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
..........................................................
ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
...........................................................
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brian Fox <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
Arnaud, the idea is to limit the scope to new regressions once we
start an RC. Otherwise we would spin in circles forever.
--Brian (mobile)
On Oct 29, 2008, at 2:04 AM, "Arnaud HERITIER" <ah...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> ok brett,
>
> I'll try to create a testcase without seam.
>
> Even if we try to improve the quality of our releases I think we
> have to fix
> any issue that we find in 2.0.x in a bug fix and not only bugs we
> introduced
> in a bug fix release.
>
> From the beginning we should have apply only bugs fixes on 2.0.x and
> put
> changes (mirrors, ..) or new features (import scope, ...) in a new
> minor
> release (2.x).
>
> That's why I didn't check on which version it was a regression. It's
> just a
> bug in 2.0.x.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> I'll submit the IT in few days.
>
> Arnaud
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Arnaud,
>>
>> The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression
>> from
>> 2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't
>> rely
>> on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to
>> make a dep
>> change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a regression from
>> 2.0.9 ->
>> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed either for 2.0.10 or early
>> 2.0.11.
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>>
>> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
>>>
>>> annoying
>>> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>>>
>>>
>>> Arnaud
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
>>> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>>>
>>>>> 2.0.9.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>>>> things:
>>>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for
>>>> Brett but
>>>> not
>>>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>>>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a
>>>> proposed patch
>>>> and
>>>> the IT available.
>>>>
>>>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>>>> - MNG-3805
>>>> - MNG-3424
>>>> - MNG-3599
>>>> for 2.0.10.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Benjamin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ..........................................................
>>> Arnaud HERITIER
>>> ..........................................................
>>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>>> ..........................................................
>>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>>> ...........................................................
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@apache.org
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ..........................................................
> Arnaud HERITIER
> ..........................................................
> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
> ..........................................................
> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
> ...........................................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>.
ok brett,
I'll try to create a testcase without seam.
Even if we try to improve the quality of our releases I think we have to fix
any issue that we find in 2.0.x in a bug fix and not only bugs we introduced
in a bug fix release.
>From the beginning we should have apply only bugs fixes on 2.0.x and put
changes (mirrors, ..) or new features (import scope, ...) in a new minor
release (2.x).
That's why I didn't check on which version it was a regression. It's just a
bug in 2.0.x.
Thanks for your help.
I'll submit the IT in few days.
Arnaud
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Arnaud,
>
> The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression from
> 2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't rely
> on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to make a dep
> change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a regression from 2.0.9 ->
> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed either for 2.0.10 or early
> 2.0.11.
>
> - Brett
>
> On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
>
> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
>>
>> annoying
>> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>>
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
>> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>>
>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>>
>>>> 2.0.9.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>>> things:
>>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for Brett but
>>> not
>>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a proposed patch
>>> and
>>> the IT available.
>>>
>>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>>> - MNG-3805
>>> - MNG-3424
>>> - MNG-3599
>>> for 2.0.10.
>>>
>>>
>>> Benjamin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ..........................................................
>> Arnaud HERITIER
>> ..........................................................
>> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
>> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
>> ..........................................................
>> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
>> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
>> ...........................................................
>>
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
..........................................................
Arnaud HERITIER
..........................................................
OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
..........................................................
ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
...........................................................
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Hi Arnaud,
The issue didn't make it clear that this is actually a regression from
2.0.8 -> 2.0.9. It'd be helpful to have an IT for this that doesn't
rely on Seam to be able to get it fixed. I'd be a little reluctant to
make a dep change this far along in 2.0.10, since it's not a
regression from 2.0.9 -> 2.0.10, but it should certainly be fixed
either for 2.0.10 or early 2.0.11.
- Brett
On 29/10/2008, at 6:42 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
> MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
> annoying
> We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
>
>
> Arnaud
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
> benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
>
>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>> 2.0.9.
>>>
>>
>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>> things:
>> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for Brett
>> but not
>> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
>> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a proposed
>> patch and
>> the IT available.
>>
>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>> - MNG-3805
>> - MNG-3424
>> - MNG-3599
>> for 2.0.10.
>>
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ..........................................................
> Arnaud HERITIER
> ..........................................................
> OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
> www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
> ..........................................................
> ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
> www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
> ...........................................................
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>.
MNG-3775 <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-3775> is also more than
annoying
We added a testcase and I can try to create an IT if necessary.
Arnaud
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <
benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu> wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9.
>>
>
> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize things:
> While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for Brett but not
> for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue about using
> LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a proposed patch and
> the IT available.
>
> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
> - MNG-3805
> - MNG-3424
> - MNG-3599
> for 2.0.10.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
..........................................................
Arnaud HERITIER
..........................................................
OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
..........................................................
ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
...........................................................
RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
Nope, it was a bug in the 3599 test that caused it to serve up a test
pom for the wagon beta-3 but was only noticeable if you didn't already
have wagon-beta-3 in your local repo.
The bootstrap stuff John did is an attempt to put the maven build and
the its into a single execution. Jason should be happy cause it uses the
bootstrap ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 10:32 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
What was the problem? Just related to the bootstrap fixes John put in
place?
(Need to be merged to 2.1.x too, btw :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 30/10/2008, at 8:34 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Ok, it's sorted out now and I'll stage RC2
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:brianf@reply.infinity.nu]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 4:41 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
>
> The 3599 tests are failing on the grid on all the vms it seems and
> on my
> machine. 3485 is also failing on windows in the grid.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:05 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
>
> I checked these over and agree, they look good, and all the ITs pass,
> so I went ahead and applied them. Thanks for figuring out the 3599
> inconsistency :)
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> On 29/10/2008, at 3:42 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
>
>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>
>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>> 2.0.9.
>>
>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>> things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599
>> for Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another
>> issue about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now
>> both a proposed patch and the IT available.
>>
>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>> - MNG-3805
>> - MNG-3424
>> - MNG-3599
>> for 2.0.10.
>>
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
What was the problem? Just related to the bootstrap fixes John put in
place?
(Need to be merged to 2.1.x too, btw :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 30/10/2008, at 8:34 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Ok, it's sorted out now and I'll stage RC2
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:brianf@reply.infinity.nu]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 4:41 PM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
>
> The 3599 tests are failing on the grid on all the vms it seems and
> on my
> machine. 3485 is also failing on windows in the grid.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:05 AM
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
>
> I checked these over and agree, they look good, and all the ITs pass,
> so I went ahead and applied them. Thanks for figuring out the 3599
> inconsistency :)
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> On 29/10/2008, at 3:42 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
>
>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>
>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>> 2.0.9.
>>
>> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
>> things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599
>> for Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another
>> issue about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now
>> both a proposed patch and the IT available.
>>
>> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
>> - MNG-3805
>> - MNG-3424
>> - MNG-3599
>> for 2.0.10.
>>
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
Ok, it's sorted out now and I'll stage RC2
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E. Fox [mailto:brianf@reply.infinity.nu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 4:41 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
The 3599 tests are failing on the grid on all the vms it seems and on my
machine. 3485 is also failing on windows in the grid.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:05 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
I checked these over and agree, they look good, and all the ITs pass,
so I went ahead and applied them. Thanks for figuring out the 3599
inconsistency :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 29/10/2008, at 3:42 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9.
>
> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
> things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599
> for Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another
> issue about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now
> both a proposed patch and the IT available.
>
> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
> - MNG-3805
> - MNG-3424
> - MNG-3599
> for 2.0.10.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
The 3599 tests are failing on the grid on all the vms it seems and on my
machine. 3485 is also failing on windows in the grid.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:05 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
I checked these over and agree, they look good, and all the ITs pass,
so I went ahead and applied them. Thanks for figuring out the 3599
inconsistency :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 29/10/2008, at 3:42 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9.
>
> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
> things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599
> for Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another
> issue about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now
> both a proposed patch and the IT available.
>
> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
> - MNG-3805
> - MNG-3424
> - MNG-3599
> for 2.0.10.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
I checked these over and agree, they look good, and all the ITs pass,
so I went ahead and applied them. Thanks for figuring out the 3599
inconsistency :)
Cheers,
Brett
On 29/10/2008, at 3:42 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9.
>
> It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
> things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599
> for Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another
> issue about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now
> both a proposed patch and the IT available.
>
> So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
> - MNG-3805
> - MNG-3424
> - MNG-3599
> for 2.0.10.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Benjamin Bentmann <be...@udo.edu>.
Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
> 2.0.9.
It's not a regression but would nicely fit our efforts to stabilize
things: While investigating why 2.0.10-RC1 passed the IT MNG-3599 for
Brett but not for me, I discovered MNG-3805. It's just another issue
about using LinkedHashSet/-Map vs. HashSet/-Map. I have by now both a
proposed patch and the IT available.
So, if somebody considers it sensible, we could additionally fix
- MNG-3805
- MNG-3424
- MNG-3599
for 2.0.10.
Benjamin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
In the new wagon beta-3 I imagine.
-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Bentmann [mailto:benjamin.bentmann@udo.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:38 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
Hm, the RC prints ugly exception stack traces of
org.apache.maven.wagon.ResourceDoesNotExistException, even on INFO
level. Just try "mvn compile -U" on this POM:
<project>
<modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.its.mngXXX</groupId>
<artifactId>coreit</artifactId>
<version>0.1</version>
<repositories>
<repository>
<id>maven-core-it</id>
<url>file:///${basedir}/repo</url>
</repository>
</repositories>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.its</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-it-helper</artifactId>
<version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</project>
Neither 2.0.9 nor 2.1.0-M1 do that, any idea where this crops up?
Benjamin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Yep, re-applied it on 2.0.x / 2.0.10-RC.
On 29/10/2008, at 6:19 AM, John Casey wrote:
> I seem to remember a fix brett put in for this when we were working
> on [what became] 2.1.0-M1. I think it's in a console resolution
> listener, possibly in maven-core or maven-artifact (-manager).
>
> I'm pretty sure this is in maven, not wagon.
>
> Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
>> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as
>>> normal.
>> Hm, the RC prints ugly exception stack traces of
>> org.apache.maven.wagon.ResourceDoesNotExistException, even on INFO
>> level. Just try "mvn compile -U" on this POM:
>> <project>
>> <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.its.mngXXX</groupId>
>> <artifactId>coreit</artifactId>
>> <version>0.1</version>
>> <repositories>
>> <repository>
>> <id>maven-core-it</id>
>> <url>file:///${basedir}/repo</url>
>> </repository>
>> </repositories>
>> <dependencies>
>> <dependency>
>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.its</groupId>
>> <artifactId>maven-it-helper</artifactId>
>> <version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
>> </dependency>
>> </dependencies>
>> </project>
>> Neither 2.0.9 nor 2.1.0-M1 do that, any idea where this crops up?
>> Benjamin
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
I seem to remember a fix brett put in for this when we were working on
[what became] 2.1.0-M1. I think it's in a console resolution listener,
possibly in maven-core or maven-artifact (-manager).
I'm pretty sure this is in maven, not wagon.
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
>
> Hm, the RC prints ugly exception stack traces of
> org.apache.maven.wagon.ResourceDoesNotExistException, even on INFO
> level. Just try "mvn compile -U" on this POM:
>
>
> <project>
> <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
>
> <groupId>org.apache.maven.its.mngXXX</groupId>
> <artifactId>coreit</artifactId>
> <version>0.1</version>
>
> <repositories>
> <repository>
> <id>maven-core-it</id>
> <url>file:///${basedir}/repo</url>
> </repository>
> </repositories>
>
> <dependencies>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.apache.maven.its</groupId>
> <artifactId>maven-it-helper</artifactId>
> <version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
> </dependency>
> </dependencies>
> </project>
>
>
> Neither 2.0.9 nor 2.1.0-M1 do that, any idea where this crops up?
>
>
> Benjamin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Benjamin Bentmann <be...@udo.edu>.
Brian E. Fox wrote:
> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
Hm, the RC prints ugly exception stack traces of
org.apache.maven.wagon.ResourceDoesNotExistException, even on INFO
level. Just try "mvn compile -U" on this POM:
<project>
<modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.its.mngXXX</groupId>
<artifactId>coreit</artifactId>
<version>0.1</version>
<repositories>
<repository>
<id>maven-core-it</id>
<url>file:///${basedir}/repo</url>
</repository>
</repositories>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.its</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-it-helper</artifactId>
<version>2.1-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</project>
Neither 2.0.9 nor 2.1.0-M1 do that, any idea where this crops up?
Benjamin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Sure, just that the final release still needs to be rolled from one or
the other, and wasn't sure which you were using. I was mostly asking
in the context of MNG-3599 that Benjamin pointed out to me on IRC
yesterday.
Since the 2.0.x is already rolled over to 2.0.11, I created a branch
2.0.10-RC (currently set to RC2-SNAPSHOT).
Cheers,
Brett
On 28/10/2008, at 8:49 PM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> I was hoping this would be a quick process and not require another
> branch,
> but if we need to then lets make a branch
>
>
> On 10/28/08 5:55 AM, "Brett Porter" <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for picking this up Brian, got sick over the weekend and
>> didn't
>> have the time to poke at this further to where I was.
>>
>> I fixed the build up after the release now, will try the binaries out
>> over the next day or two.
>>
>> For the purpose of committing any fixes, will you be creating an RC
>> branch like before, or pulling further RCs from maven-2.0.x?
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> On 28/10/2008, at 6:43 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>>
>>> It's been stalled for a while so it's time to JFDI.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The last 2 issues are resolved for 2.0.10, which had a combined 75
>>> votes. I bumped the extension issue to 2.0.11 since it is
>>> complicated,
>>> no patch yet and it's debatable if it's even worth fixing in 2.0.x.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Here's the list of issues fixed in 2.0.10:
>>>
>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14112&styleName
>>> =Html&projectId=10500&Create=Create
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And I've staged RC-1 here:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~brianf/staging-repository/org/apache/maven/apa
>>> che-maven/2.0.10-RC1/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>>> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as
>>> normal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@apache.org
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by "Brian E. Fox" <br...@reply.infinity.nu>.
I was hoping this would be a quick process and not require another branch,
but if we need to then lets make a branch
On 10/28/08 5:55 AM, "Brett Porter" <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for picking this up Brian, got sick over the weekend and didn't
> have the time to poke at this further to where I was.
>
> I fixed the build up after the release now, will try the binaries out
> over the next day or two.
>
> For the purpose of committing any fixes, will you be creating an RC
> branch like before, or pulling further RCs from maven-2.0.x?
>
> - Brett
>
> On 28/10/2008, at 6:43 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
>
>> It's been stalled for a while so it's time to JFDI.
>>
>>
>>
>> The last 2 issues are resolved for 2.0.10, which had a combined 75
>> votes. I bumped the extension issue to 2.0.11 since it is complicated,
>> no patch yet and it's debatable if it's even worth fixing in 2.0.x.
>>
>>
>>
>> Here's the list of issues fixed in 2.0.10:
>>
>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14112&styleName
>> =Html&projectId=10500&Create=Create
>>
>>
>>
>> And I've staged RC-1 here:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~brianf/staging-repository/org/apache/maven/apa
>> che-maven/2.0.10-RC1/
>>
>>
>>
>> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
>> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [RC] Moving forward with 2.0.10
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Thanks for picking this up Brian, got sick over the weekend and didn't
have the time to poke at this further to where I was.
I fixed the build up after the release now, will try the binaries out
over the next day or two.
For the purpose of committing any fixes, will you be creating an RC
branch like before, or pulling further RCs from maven-2.0.x?
- Brett
On 28/10/2008, at 6:43 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
> It's been stalled for a while so it's time to JFDI.
>
>
>
> The last 2 issues are resolved for 2.0.10, which had a combined 75
> votes. I bumped the extension issue to 2.0.11 since it is complicated,
> no patch yet and it's debatable if it's even worth fixing in 2.0.x.
>
>
>
> Here's the list of issues fixed in 2.0.10:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=14112&styleName
> =Html&projectId=10500&Create=Create
>
>
>
> And I've staged RC-1 here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~brianf/staging-repository/org/apache/maven/apa
> che-maven/2.0.10-RC1/
>
>
>
> Please try it out and see if we have any remaining regressions over
> 2.0.9. If it looks good, then I'll recut the official build as normal.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian
>
>
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org