Yes, I am working on it now....will be done in minutes Cheers, Bo
> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 10:17 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Dan Diephouse; Lin, Bozhong > Subject: Re: votable build > > > > The pom files still MUST be signed. Even if they are > generated, they are > an important part of the distributed artifacts and thus must > be signed. > Basically, if I download a pom file, I need to able to be > sure it is the > CORRECT pom file and not a hacked version. > > Dan > > > On Tuesday November 21 2006 1:52 pm, Dan Diephouse wrote: > > It seems that we can get by without having this in the > header for the > > moment (see the incubator thread). I'm going to start a > vote shortly. > > > > - Dan > > > > Daniel Kulp wrote: > > >On Monday November 20 2006 10:14 am, Bozhong Lin wrote: > > >>signing for all those pom or maven-metadata.xml files should be no > > >>problem. But those pom files are generated by maven during deploy > > >>process, I am not sure we need to add Apache License > Header, and how > > >>can we add. > > > > > >The one for the top level (just cxf/2.0-incubator-M1) did > retain the > > >header. Thus, somehow, the release plugin is OK with it if the > > > source is in some form or other. > > > > > >You may need to ask about it on the maven list. (or #maven on > > >irc.codehaus.org) > > > > > >I wonder if putting the comment inside the <project> tag instead of > > > before it would allow it to keep it. Something needs > to be done. > > > The ServiceMix vot on general@ was just flagged for it. > > > > > >Dan > > > > > >>Cheers, > > >>Bo > > >> > > >>Daniel Kulp wrote: > > >>>Bo, > > >>> > > >>>The pom files also need to be signed. I don't think the > > >>>maven-metadata.xml files need to be, but it wouldn't > hurt to do so. > > >>>Thus, I would sign them as well. > > >>> > > >>>Also, a lot of the pom files don't have the proper Apache Licence > > >>>header. That definitely needs to be fixed. > > >>> > > >>>Dan > > >>> > > >>>On Monday November 20 2006 9:54 am, Bozhong Lin wrote: > > >>>>The new votable build has been uploaded here [1] again, > hope this > > >>>>time it will be really "votable", and I can go home for > some sleep > > >>>>now. :-) > > >>>> > > >>>>Cheers, > > >>>>Bo > > >>>> > > >>>>[1] http://people.apache.org/~blin/ > > >>>> > > >>>>Bozhong Lin wrote: > > >>>>>Looks like we got some more commits today for minor > fixes (readme > > >>>>>updates, bin scripts fixes, etc) and one major fix for Eclipse > > >>>>>Tooling project. To ensure that every committer is > happy about the > > >>>>>votable build, I am going to cut another build right > now. Please > > >>>>> do NOT commit new code in the next two hours. If you need to > > >>>>> commit any critical or major fixes, please let me know on IRC > > >>>>> channel. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Cheers, > > >>>>>Bo > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Bozhong Lin wrote: > > >>>>>>To avoid confusion of what are actual released artifacts, I > > >>>>>>adjusted the uploaded directory a little bit. > Accessing here [1] > > >>>>>>should give you a more clear picture about release. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>Cheers, > > >>>>>>Bo > > >>>>>>[1] > http://people.apache.org/~blin/ > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>Bozhong Lin wrote: > > >>>>>>>Hi all, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>A votable build has been created and upload here [1]. It is > > >>>>>>> great that the build includes all the minor issues addressed > > >>>>>>> and also includes https demo and sequencetest fixes at final > > >>>>>>> moment. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>The new version for next development iteration is now > > >>>>>>>"2.0-incubator-RC-SNAPSHOT". > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>Cheers, > > >>>>>>>Bo > > >>>>>>>[1] > > > >>>>>>>http://people.apache.org/~blin/incubator-cxf-2.0-M1/org /apache/c > >>>>>>>x f/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Bozhong Lin wrote: -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 F:781-902-8001 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
