Matthias and I spoke offline a bit and I think it merits writing up a
JIRA which would allow us to have stuff in the repo so that projects can
include it. I'm not sure how feasible this is, given that the TCK needs
to run against a native portal environment, but I certainly wouldn't be
opposed to someone researching this.
For now though, I think the release looks good provided we get the
LISCENCE and NOTICE files straightened out.
On 01/13/2011 10:05 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
there is a reason . the bits are no maven artifacts, so there is no
need to deploy them to central
(and we never did that).
Michale,
using your private URL is fine; Once the release is done, we will
continue the regular process. where the bits
'just' got deployed to the MyFaces (Portal TCK) site
-M
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Matthias Wessendorf<mat...@apache.org> wrote:
was there any reason why you didn't use Nexus for the release procedure?
MyFaces (sub)projects agreed to use this..
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Michael Freedman
<michael.freed...@oracle.com> wrote:
Please vote on the proposed release of MyFaces Portlet Bridge 2.0.0 TCK.
This is the final version of the JSR 329 TCK and corresponds to Portlet
2.0 Bridge for JavaServer Faces 1.2 specification which was
finalized/approved by the JCP last month.
Note: The TCK is designed to be built and run directly from the maven
project. Because of this users are pointed directly to the subversion tag
associated with version of the TCK:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/portlet-bridge/tck/tags/jsr329-1.0.0
Hence there are no repository artifacts built or hosted. However, for
convenience we do provide a downloadable version of this project
These components can be inspected in
http://people.apache.org/~mfreedman/portlet-bridge-tck/jsr329-1.0.0/
I have verified that the distributables can be expanded and the TCK can be
built/run from this. In addition I have verified the contents in the
subversion tag.
Please review these materials and vote.
------------------------------------------------
[ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
and why..............
Thanks,
-Mike-
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
