> On Oct. 3, 2012, 5:02 p.m., Hugo Trippaers wrote:
> > Rohit,
> > 
> > Rampart need to stay at version 1.5.1. That is the version the files have 
> > been generated with and the only version that will properly get all 
> > dependencies right for the maven build. I'mm will try to have a look at the 
> > 'deprecated' ant build, but now the focus is on the maven build. Please try 
> > that one.
> 
> Hugo Trippaers wrote:
>     I had to reset the version of axiom to 1.2.7 to work around some problems 
> in 1.2.8. This might be related to jdk 1.6 versus 1.7, but i'm not sure about 
> that. Please give it a go with java 1.6. 
>     
>     Cheers,
>     
>     Hugo

Okay, please do that and let me know if you want to maintain the deprecated ant 
build system for a while, if not I'll close this review.


- Rohit


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/7406/#review12135
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 3, 2012, 10:56 a.m., Rohit Yadav wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/7406/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 3, 2012, 10:56 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam, Hugo Trippaers, and edison 
> su.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Maven: Fix rampart version and deps for awsapi
> 
> Bump up rampart version, 1.6.2 works.
> Re-adding dependency for awsapi artifacts, fixes ant build complains.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <[email protected]>
> 
> Download the original patch and git am <patch-file>:
> http://patchbin.baagi.org/p?id=ixeeit
> 
> ---
> Posted with bhaisaab's rbtool fork: https://github.com/bhaisaab/RBTool
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   awsapi/pom.xml 10b9c9b 
>   pom.xml 0366149 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7406/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> master
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Rohit Yadav
> 
>

Reply via email to