Maybe an issue, maybe not...

One of the checks I often do is to verify that the source-release corresponds to
the svn tag, more-or-less.

To do this, I export the svn tag, and I unzip the source, and then I put these
into a testing Eclipse project, select both root folders, and say
compare-with-each-other.

In this project, that doesn't work, due to line ending issues.

The source-zip seems to have mixture of line endings, in various files.
I thought that most of them were "lf", but then I saw a bunch that had "crlf".

Examples:  the pom.xml in core has "lf", but java files have "crlf".
My svn export has both of these files having crlf, because the svn property of
eol-style:native is set for both of these, and I'm working on a Windows machine.

This seems puzzling, because both the Java files and the pom have the svn
property set: eol-style:native.  It would seem that the build would check out
this stuff on one kind of machine, so all these files should have the same line
endings.  Any idea how it happened that the source-release.zip ended up with
files having different line endings?

-Marshall




On 8/8/2013 7:09 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've posted uimaFIT 2.0.0 rc1.  There were 70 Jiras fixed, see
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%222.0.0uimaFIT%22
>
> The source and binary zip/tars are staged to
> http://people.apache.org/~rec/uimafit-release-candidates/2.0.0-rc1/
> <http://people.apache.org/%7Erec/uimafit-release-candidates/2.0.0-rc1/>
>
> The Maven artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-078/org/apache/uima/
>
> The SVN tags are here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/sandbox/uimafit/tags/uimafit-2.0.0-rc1
>
> See http://uima.apache.org/testing-builds.html for suggestions on how to test
> release candidates.
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ] 0   Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because …
>
> Ok, this is my very first one for the ASF. Hit me! 
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Richard
>
>

Reply via email to