Re: [VOTE][VFS] release commons-vfs 1.0 based on RC9

Hi Oliver! The ant build succeeded, but in the resulting jar the LICENSE.txt was missing (only NOTICE.txt is copied to META-INF). This has been fixed now. Ciao, Mario - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

[VOTE][VFS] release commons-vfs 1.0 based on RC9

Hi! Here we go again - please vote if we can push this RC to a release, finally: 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/site [ ] +1 I support this release [ ] +0 [ ] -0 [ ] -1 I do not

Re: [VOTE][VFS] release commons-vfs 1.0 based on RC9

+1 from me. Niall On 12/18/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! Here we go again - please vote if we can push this RC to a release, finally: 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/site

Re: [VOTE][VFS] release commons-vfs 1.0 based on RC9

Hi, I checked the RC, but had some problems with the maven 1 build, which failed because of a failing test case (Test org.apache.commons.vfs.provider.ftp.test.FtpProviderTestCase failed). The release notes say that some tests can fail, but the jar would be correctly built. Shouldn't failing

Re: [VOTE][VFS] release commons-vfs 1.0 based on RC9

Hi! Shouldn't failing test cases be ignored by default because of the complicated test setup? Hmmm maybe ... we can discuss this for the next release, no? The ant build succeeded, but in the resulting jar the LICENSE.txt was missing (only NOTICE.txt is copied to META-INF). This is odd,