Re: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
nice - I closed the issue. thanks uwe On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > Hi all, > > The missing maven artifacts for the fast-vector-highlighter contrib of > Lucene Java in version 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 are now available at: > > http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/lucene/ > http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/lucene/ > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > uschind...@apache.org > Apache Lucene Java Committer > Bremen, Germany > http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/ > >> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:41 PM >> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org; gene...@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 >> and 2.9.1 >> >> I got 3 binding votes from Grant, Mike, and Ted (and one from Simon, who >> was >> a big help on Sunday evening when I created the artifacts), so I push the >> maven artifacts onto the rsync repo in few minutes. >> >> Thanks! >> >> - >> Uwe Schindler >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >> http://www.thetaphi.de >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> >> > -Original Message----- >> > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] >> > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 7:03 PM >> > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > Subject: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and >> > 2.9.1 >> > >> > Sorry, >> > >> > I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to >> "maybe >> > start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I >> > ask >> > again, an I will start the vote for now. >> > >> > >> == >> > == >> > Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter >> of >> > Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. >> > >> > You can find the artifacts here: >> > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ >> > >> > This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir >> on >> > p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which >> > conforms >> > to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during >> > build, >> > I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). >> > >> > All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release >> was >> > originally built by Mike McCandless). >> > >> == >> > == >> > >> > What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): >> > >> > If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache >> > archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other >> > contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from >> the >> > same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, >> for >> > 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does >> not >> > apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with >> > this >> > maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the >> > binary >> > distrib. >> > >> > What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is >> > different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in >> earlier >> > mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last >> > changed file. >> > >> > So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by >> my >> > key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. >> > >> > Uwe >> > >> > - >> > Uwe Schindler >> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >> > http://www.thetaphi.de >> > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> > >> > >> > > -Original Message- >> > > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] >> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM >> > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 >> > and >> > > 2.9 >> > > >> > > >> > > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven a
RE: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
Hi all, The missing maven artifacts for the fast-vector-highlighter contrib of Lucene Java in version 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 are now available at: http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/lucene/ http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/lucene/ Uwe - Uwe Schindler uschind...@apache.org Apache Lucene Java Committer Bremen, Germany http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/ > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:41 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org; gene...@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 > and 2.9.1 > > I got 3 binding votes from Grant, Mike, and Ted (and one from Simon, who > was > a big help on Sunday evening when I created the artifacts), so I push the > maven artifacts onto the rsync repo in few minutes. > > Thanks! > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > -Original Message- > > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 7:03 PM > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and > > 2.9.1 > > > > Sorry, > > > > I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to > "maybe > > start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I > > ask > > again, an I will start the vote for now. > > > > > == > > == > > Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter > of > > Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. > > > > You can find the artifacts here: > > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > > > > This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir > on > > p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which > > conforms > > to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during > > build, > > I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). > > > > All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release > was > > originally built by Mike McCandless). > > > == > > == > > > > What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): > > > > If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache > > archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other > > contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from > the > > same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, > for > > 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does > not > > apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with > > this > > maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the > > binary > > distrib. > > > > What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is > > different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in > earlier > > mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last > > changed file. > > > > So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by > my > > key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. > > > > Uwe > > > > - > > Uwe Schindler > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM > > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 > > and > > > 2.9 > > > > > > > > > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for > > > : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven > > > reposititory? > > > > > > It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done > before > > > publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on > > and > > > released -- including all of the source code in them. > > > > > > The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call > a > > > vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ..
RE: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
I got 3 binding votes from Grant, Mike, and Ted (and one from Simon, who was a big help on Sunday evening when I created the artifacts), so I push the maven artifacts onto the rsync repo in few minutes. Thanks! - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 7:03 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and > 2.9.1 > > Sorry, > > I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to "maybe > start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I > ask > again, an I will start the vote for now. > > == > == > Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter of > Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. > > You can find the artifacts here: > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > > This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir on > p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which > conforms > to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during > build, > I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). > > All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release was > originally built by Mike McCandless). > == > == > > What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): > > If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache > archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other > contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from the > same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, for > 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does not > apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with > this > maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the > binary > distrib. > > What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is > different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in earlier > mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last > changed file. > > So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by my > key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 > and > > 2.9 > > > > > > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for > > : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven > > reposititory? > > > > It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done before > > publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on > and > > released -- including all of the source code in them. > > > > The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call a > > vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ... > considering > > the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick. > > > > : > > : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is > > top- > > : > level > > : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: > > : > > > : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > > : > > > : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got > > votes > > : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. > > : > > > : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts > > : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version > of > > the > > : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn > > version, > > : > even > > : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, > but > > not > > : > very nice. > > : > > > : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future,
Re: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
+1 form none PMC On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Michael McCandless wrote: > +1 > > Mike > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: >> Sorry, >> >> I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to "maybe >> start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I ask >> again, an I will start the vote for now. >> >> >> Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter of >> Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. >> >> You can find the artifacts here: >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ >> >> This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir on >> p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which conforms >> to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during build, >> I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). >> >> All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release was >> originally built by Mike McCandless). >> >> >> What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): >> >> If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache >> archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other >> contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from the >> same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, for >> 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does not >> apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with this >> maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the binary >> distrib. >> >> What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is >> different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in earlier >> mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last >> changed file. >> >> So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by my >> key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. >> >> Uwe >> >> - >> Uwe Schindler >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >> http://www.thetaphi.de >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM >>> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and >>> 2.9 >>> >>> >>> : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for >>> : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven >>> reposititory? >>> >>> It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done before >>> publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on and >>> released -- including all of the source code in them. >>> >>> The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call a >>> vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ... considering >>> the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick. >>> >>> : >>> : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is >>> top- >>> : > level >>> : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: >>> : > >>> : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ >>> : > >>> : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got >>> votes >>> : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. >>> : > >>> : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts >>> : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version of >>> the >>> : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn >>> version, >>> : > even >>> : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, but >>> not >>> : > very nice. >>> : > >>> : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future, to >>> get >>> : > the real number. >>> : > >>> : > Uwe >>> : > >>> : > - >>> : > Uwe Schindler >>> : > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >>> : > http://www.thetaphi.de >>> : > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >>> : > >>> : > >>> : > > -Original Message- >>> : > > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] >>> : > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM >>> : > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >>> : > > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and >>> 2.9 >>> : > > >>> : > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we >>> could >>> : > > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be >>> : > easy >>> : > > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the >>> : > > signatures. >>> : > > >>> : > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: >>> : > > >>> : > > > hi folks, >>> : > > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlight
Re: [VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
+1 Mike On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > Sorry, > > I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to "maybe > start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I ask > again, an I will start the vote for now. > > > Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter of > Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. > > You can find the artifacts here: > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > > This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir on > p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which conforms > to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during build, > I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). > > All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release was > originally built by Mike McCandless). > > > What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): > > If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache > archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other > contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from the > same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, for > 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does not > apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with this > maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the binary > distrib. > > What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is > different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in earlier > mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last > changed file. > > So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by my > key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM >> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and >> 2.9 >> >> >> : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for >> : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven >> reposititory? >> >> It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done before >> publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on and >> released -- including all of the source code in them. >> >> The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call a >> vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ... considering >> the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick. >> >> : >> : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is >> top- >> : > level >> : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: >> : > >> : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ >> : > >> : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got >> votes >> : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. >> : > >> : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts >> : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version of >> the >> : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn >> version, >> : > even >> : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, but >> not >> : > very nice. >> : > >> : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future, to >> get >> : > the real number. >> : > >> : > Uwe >> : > >> : > - >> : > Uwe Schindler >> : > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >> : > http://www.thetaphi.de >> : > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> : > >> : > >> : > > -Original Message- >> : > > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] >> : > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM >> : > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org >> : > > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and >> 2.9 >> : > > >> : > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we >> could >> : > > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be >> : > easy >> : > > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the >> : > > signatures. >> : > > >> : > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: >> : > > >> : > > > hi folks, >> : > > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been >> pushed >> : > > > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template >> inside >> : > > > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of >> : > > > LUCENE-2107. I a
[VOTE] Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0.0 and 2.9.1
Sorry, I initially didn't want to start a vote, as Grant only proposed to "maybe start one". But nobody responded (esp. to the questions in this mail) I ask again, an I will start the vote for now. Please vote, that the missing artifacts for of fast-verctor-highlighter of Lucene Java 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 should be pushed to repoX.maven.org. You can find the artifacts here: http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ This dir contains only the maven folder to be copied to maven-rsync dir on p.a.o. The top-level version in the maven metadata is 3.0.0, which conforms to the current state on maven (so during merging both folders during build, I set preference to metadata.xml of 3.0.0). All files are signed by my PGP key (even the 2.9.1 ones; that release was originally built by Mike McCandless). What I additionally found out until now (because Simon nagged me): If you compare the JAR files inside the binary ZIP file from the apache archive and the JAR files directly published on maven (for the other contribs), the MD5s/SHA1s are different even as they are created from the same source code (because the timestamps inside the JAR are different, for 2.9.1 another JDK compiler/platform was used). This interestingly does not apply to lucene-core.jar in 3.0. Because of that I see no problem with this maven release, even that they are not the orginal JAR files from the binary distrib. What is not nice, is that the svn revision number in the manifest is different, but else is exactly the same, see my comments below in earlier mails about changing the ant script for showing the SVN rev of the last changed file. So if nobody objects to release these rebuild jar files, all signed by my key, I would like to simply put them on the maven-rsync folder. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] > Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:48 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: (NAG) Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and > 2.9 > > > : What to do now, any votes on adding the missing maven artifacts for > : fast-vector-highlighter to 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 on the apache maven > reposititory? > > It's not even clear to me that anything special needs to be done before > publishing those jars to maven. 2.9.1 and 3.0.0 were already voted on and > released -- including all of the source code in them. > > The safest bet least likely to anger the process gods is just to call a > vote (new thread with VOTE in the subject) and cast a vote ... considering > the sources has already been reviewed it should go pretty quick. > > : > : > I rebuilt the maven-dir for 2.9.1 and 3.0.0, merged them (3.0.0 is > top- > : > level > : > version) and extracted only fast-vector-highlighter: > : > > : > http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/ > : > > : > I will copy this dir to the maven folder on people.a.o, when I got > votes > : > (how many)? At least someone should check the signatures. > : > > : > By the way, we have a small error in our ant build.xml that inserts > : > svnversion into the manifest file. This version is not the version of > the > : > last changed item (would be svnversion -c) but the current svn > version, > : > even > : > that I checked out the corresponding tags. It's no problem at all, but > not > : > very nice. > : > > : > Maybe we should change build.xml to call "svnversion -c" in future, to > get > : > the real number. > : > > : > Uwe > : > > : > - > : > Uwe Schindler > : > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > : > http://www.thetaphi.de > : > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > : > > : > > : > > -Original Message- > : > > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] > : > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:26 PM > : > > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > : > > Subject: Re: Push fast-vector-highlighter mvn artifacts for 3.0 and > 2.9 > : > > > : > > I suppose we could put up the artifacts on a dev site and then we > could > : > > vote to release both of them pretty quickly. I think that should be > : > easy > : > > to do, since it pretty much only involves verifying the jar and the > : > > signatures. > : > > > : > > On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > : > > > : > > > hi folks, > : > > > The maven artifacts for fast-vector-highlighter have never been > pushed > : > > > since it was released because there were no pom.xml.template > inside > : > > > the module. I added a pom file a day ago in the context of > : > > > LUCENE-2107. I already talked to uwe and grant how to deal with > this > : > > > issues and if we should push the artifact for Lucene 2.9 / 3.0. > Since > : > > > this is only a metadata file we could consider rebuilding the > : > > > artef
