The RC looks pretty good, just a couple of comments/questions:
1) Theres a failing test - does it matter?
http://tinyurl.com/ymh763
2) The dependencies are mis-leading since they include slide and jcifs
which are in the vfs sandbox and not part of the release:
I just thought about running the RAT tool over the source distro -
popped up 65 files missing source file license headers - including 10
java class files - I have fixed the ones that seemed to matter:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=485638
Since I think the above warrants a new
On 12/9/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
After an eventful year and some help from others I managed to cut a new RC.
snip/
I see Niall has already made some improvements (thanks).
Ofcourse its upto you, but I'd suggest making the (new) RC available
for a few days before
Hi Rahul!
Ofcourse its upto you, but I'd suggest making the (new) RC available
for a few days before calling the vote, especially since there has
been quite a gap between the last RC and now.
Hehe, for sure, I was just too enthusiastic ;-)
On the other hand, more often than not things came up
On 12/11/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
And I too would like another way how we move forward to a release (at
least if my understanding matches with what you mean).
Is it like this?:
*) create a version tag in svn - the final tag - in this case vfs-1.0
snap/
No, tag
Hi Niall!
1) Theres a failing test - does it matter?
http://tinyurl.com/ymh763
No, I've documented it in the release notes ... though ... hmmm ...
maybe I found a way to make it run too
2) The dependencies are mis-leading since they include slide and jcifs
which are in the vfs
Hi Rahul!
No, tag remains VFS_1_0_RC9.
Hmmm ... I don't understand why we still need the RC tags, if something
is dangerous, than that we have artifacts with a release version
numbering even if its not the real final release.
If we need a pre stage in svn, wouldn't it be sufficient to simply tag
On 12/11/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Niall!
1) Theres a failing test - does it matter?
http://tinyurl.com/ymh763
No, I've documented it in the release notes ... though ... hmmm ...
maybe I found a way to make it run too
2) The dependencies are mis-leading since
On 12/11/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rahul!
No, tag remains VFS_1_0_RC9.
Hmmm ... I don't understand why we still need the RC tags, if something
is dangerous, than that we have artifacts with a release version
numbering even if its not the real final release.
snip/
Hi!
After an eventful year and some help from others I managed to cut a new RC.
Please find the RC at
http://people.apache.org/~imario/vfs
The site can be reviewed at
http://people.apache.org/~imario/vfs-1.0-RC8/site
*) imported commons-compress into vfs codebase to get rid of snapshot
10 matches
Mail list logo
