On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 23:58 +0200, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 16:27 +0200, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> >> There are a lot of hand made poms in the repo so i don't see that as a
> >> problem.
> >>
> >> AFAIK the difference between api and implementation is the
> >> dependencies section, so it's just a matter of copying it and strip
> >> all unneded deps (all of them?).
> >
> > +1
> >
> > any volunteers...?
> >
> > - robert
>
> I can do it. We only need to agree on a suitable place in SVN where we
> can store it.
>
I'm currently working on the two securitymanager-related bugs we
introduced into logging in the last release; these cause problems for
people running code in applets and similar restricted environments. A
unit test that demonstrates the problem has already been committed (and
fails).
Once that is done, I think we should get a 1.1.1 release out with that
plus the fixed maven poms; having all the dependencies declared
mandatory is rather unpleasant. Plus junit should be scope=test of
course.
Regarding the place for the pom.xml, can't we just put it in the trunk
directory? Of course we need to comment it, so people don't think it can
be used to *build* jcl.
And by the way, the new nightly-build system is currently set up to use
maven1; that needs to be fixed to use ant instead I think. AFAIK, the
maven1 project.xml just creates the site.
Oh, and can we get rid of all that ${pom.artifactId.substring(8)} stuff?
It's confusing, and I don't see the benefits as this project isn't going
to change its name. Just putting "logging" in there would be so much
clearer.
Regards,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
