Hi Luis, > On 22 May 2015, at 11:02, Luis Bernardo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I release cannot not officially be vetoed > (http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html) but obviously having consensus > is desirable and should be the goal. > > So before I spend time checking and testing the package I would like us to > reach a consensus here whether this vote still stands.
For what it's worth: from my end, the +1 would stand. I was merely expressing a preference, and even offered to assist with resolving the warnings, but Simon had another solution in mind, which works fine for me. > In my opinion, and given the fact that the number of warning/errors with > checkstyle and findbugs is dependent on the version used, having a litmus > test on checkstyle and findbugs warnings for a release only makes sense if we > were to use the most recent released versions of checkstyle and findbugs For FB, does it make sense to make that "the most recent version that works with the minimum JVM requirement of 1.6" ? As long as there is no minimum requirement of 1.7+ for FOP itself, that should be 2.0.3, then? That said, those committers who want to use a more recent version, should be free -- and even encouraged -- to do so. Just my 2 cents... KR Andreas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
