Re: [VFS] NIO Version Questions

Mark Fortner wrote: There was some discussion during the last release about a NIO-compatible version of VFS. This raised a few questions in my mind. 1. Is there a branch where this work should start? This is easy enough to create one if there's desire :) 2. Are there any specific

Re: Stian to PMC

+1 Congrats! Sergio Fernández wrote: congrats, Stian! On May 25, 2016 6:11 PM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: Done - now live on http://commons.apache.org/team-list.html Do I need to do something special to get Jira admin access? (e.g. to manage Versions) On 24 May 2016

Re: [Poll][VFS] Switch to Git

+1 wfm Bernd Eckenfels wrote: Hello, I would like to be able to use Git with the Apache Commons VFS repo. As we agreed upon I call out the intention to do this and ask you for your oppinion. Now that we have the 2.1 release out of the way the switch wont affect any planned steps. Anybody

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

sebb wrote: On 22 May 2016 at 03:54, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: > It's not a problem, it's an inconvenience. > > Ideally, Maven builds the artifacts with the intended names. This creates > consistency through every VOTE message, xsum/sig verification automation

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

factId it is in. It works for Accumulo only because we explicitly attach it to the module with the desired artifactId. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:49 PM Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Overriding the finalName is what I was assuming I'd need to change, but thanks for the extra context, Christopher.

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

e you realize why it's done that way. Perhaps something like that might be needed here, since this is in a similar multi-module situation. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:36 AM sebb<seb...@gmail.com> wrote: On 20 May 2016 at 15:39, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Benedikt Ritt

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 released

The Apache Commons team is pleased to announce the release of Apache Commons VFS 2.1. Apache Commons VFS provides a single API for accessing various different file systems. It presents a uniform view of the files from various different sources, such as the files on local disk, on an HTTP

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello Josh, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr., 20. Mai 2016 um 05:28 Uhr: > One more (final?) snafu: turns out I used the "wrong" name for the > artifacts in dist.a.o which caused the website to have the wrong links. > >

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

me help (I knew what needed to be done already, but, obviously, I didn't do it quite right on my own). I plan to send out the ANNOUNCE as soon as I see most of the mirrors are updated again. - Josh sebb wrote: On 19 May 2016 at 18:43, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote:

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

Thanks, Benedikt! Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello Josh, sebb<seb...@gmail.com> schrieb am Do., 19. Mai 2016 um 10:55 Uhr: On 19 May 2016 at 03:14, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Hi all, Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and release) were

Re: [VFS] Final steps for 2.1

sebb wrote: On 19 May 2016 at 03:14, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Hi all, Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and release) were both updated, trunk was bumped to 2.2-SNAPSHOT, nexus repo was released, reporter.a.o was updated, and the svn tag was r

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

No worries! Hope you had a great vacation. :) Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello Josh, Good work, and awesome you made it through our release process :-) sorry I wasn't able to vote on this RC. I've been on vacation last week. BR, Benedikt Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> schrieb am Mi., 1

[VFS] Final steps for 2.1

Hi all, Worked through the remaining steps for this release. dist.a.o (dev and release) were both updated, trunk was bumped to 2.2-SNAPSHOT, nexus repo was released, reporter.a.o was updated, and the svn tag was renamed. I did remove the checksums on the signatures before promoting the Nexus

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

on the steps to promote these artifacts (with the concerns acknowledged that were mentioned during the vote). - Josh Josh Elser wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

, Bernd<e...@zusammenkunft.net> wrote: Hello, Thanks Josh! This is a binding +1 (however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another RC or before releasing the repo): 2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>: All, Please consider t

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

use the sandbox profile, via `mvn -Pinclude-sandbox verify`, things fall over because the above mentioned module is missing. [4]: everything properly checks out, but the format of the md5 file was different for the artifacts in dist.apache compared to repository.apache. On 2016-05-11 20:29, Josh

Re: [VFS] NOTICE required for Jackrabbit's JcrUtils? (was: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2)

Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: I'll ask on dev@jackrabbit to be sure. > > Agreed - so I've tracked it ashttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-611 > > Could you assign it to me so I can mark it as In Progress? Tried, but cannot find you as an assign target. BTW, there is a sibling

Re: The state of 2.1

. I assume Josh Elser (as the Release Manager for this candidate) will formally mark the 2.1 RC2 thread as [CANCELLED] and then we can prepare a new RC3 for voting. ..but be aware that many Apache committers have been involved with ApacheCon which just finished last Friday, so folks probably have

Re: [VFS] NOTICE required for Jackrabbit's JcrUtils? (was: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2)

+cc busbey (in case he misses this discuss, otherwise) Does this make sense to you? I'm sure you have a better understanding than I do at the fringes of licensing @ the ASF :) tl;dr Those copied files from jackrabbit were added after the code was already graduated from Incubator, thus, the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

checks out, but the format of the md5 file was different for the artifacts in dist.apache compared to repository.apache. On 2016-05-11 20:29, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2). Maven repository: https://repos

[VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1166 Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ r13608 MD5 commons-vfs-distribution-2.1-bin.tar.gz

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

sebb wrote: On 11 May 2016 at 15:49, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: > Well, I'd ask that you tell me what you think is wrong in what currently > exists. I did what you asked for rc1 already, but apparently you still find > it insufficient? The RN section

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

are not BC errors. I don't have time just now, but I may be able to update them later today. On 11 May 2016 at 05:06, Gary Gregory<garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: Don't despair, I plan on being +1 for the next RC :-) Gary On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> w

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

for the next RC. Will try to get rc2 out in the next day or two. Josh Elser wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc1). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1163 Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

Benedikt Ritter wrote: - The name is different from Release 1.0. It has been vfs-1.0, no it is > commons-vfs-project-2.1. I think we should stick with the convention > established with v1.0. > I've looked at the tag names again. It looks completely mixed up. We have: vfs-1.0/

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

tomorrow morning to have a look. Benedikt Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr., 6. Mai 2016 um 16:24 Uhr: Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding votes. **PMC, please vote.** (Thanks to Stian for the nonbinding vote) Consider the vote extended another

Re: [VFS] BC breaks in VFS 2.1 RC1

changes I wrote about plus updates to the latest Commons Net and IO IIRC (on my phone now). I would like a new RC to pick up these changes, see my other email(s). Gary On May 8, 2016 11:50 AM, "Josh Elser"<els...@apache.org> wrote: Gary -- how quickly can you turn aroun

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

row morning to have a look. Benedikt Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr., 6. Mai 2016 um 16:24 Uhr: Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding votes. **PMC, please vote.** (Thanks to Stian for the nonbinding vote) Consider the vote extended another 48hrs

Re: [VFS] BC breaks in VFS 2.1 RC1

wrote: On 6 May 2016 at 22:40, Gary Gregory<garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: I'm creating a new thread here instead of hijacking the VOTE thread. First, let me express my gratitude to Stian Soiland-Reyes for RM'ing a release, I'm sure he did not know what he was getting himself into! ;-

Re: [VFS] BC breaks in VFS 2.1 RC1

TE thread. First, let me express my gratitude to Stian Soiland-Reyes for RM'ing a release, I'm sure he did not know what he was getting himself into! ;-) Huh? ... that was/is Josh Elser. Who does (also) deserve many thanks. Part of me writing this here is flushing out for myself, voters, and casua

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

Gary Gregory wrote: Some of the versions of jars in this page are out of date. Why not refer to the generated page: https://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/dependency-management.html from the "About" page and other places if any? +1

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

Thanks Gary! Will keep an eye out. Gary Gregory wrote: Sorry, quite busy this week, I'll try to take a look later today or this weekend. Gary On May 6, 2016 7:24 AM, "Josh Elser"<els...@apache.org> wrote: Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no bind

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

Well, we've already passed the 3day vote window and have no binding votes. **PMC, please vote.** (Thanks to Stian for the nonbinding vote) Consider the vote extended another 48hrs. On May 3, 2016 11:43 PM, "Josh Elser" <els...@apache.org> wrote: > All, > > Plea

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

On May 6, 2016 2:45 AM, "Jörg Schaible" <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi Josh, > > Josh Elser wrote: > > > Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> > >>> > Hi Josh, > >>> > > >>> &g

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

Jörg Schaible wrote: Jörg Schaible wrote: > Hi Josh, > > Josh Elser wrote: > >> Oh, well then! No pressure:) >> >> I'll have to find some time to re-read all of the conversation between >> Jörg and Stian, but my initial reaction is the same as what

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

t verified against this many different Java implementations and versions. Of course, the more testing the better! I will try to inspect the release and vote on it this evening. Ralph On May 4, 2016, at 9:43 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Thanks for investigating and sharing your fi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

ResolutionException [ERROR] [ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resume the build with the command [ERROR] mvn -rf :commons-vfs2 = %< == The reason is an invalid (transitive) system dependency on tools.jar of Hadoop which is no longer

Re: [VFS] WIP specific release instructions

sebb wrote: On 5 May 2016 at 05:49, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: Have a look at the scripts in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/scripts/ I used those for VALIDATOR and NET. Cool. Thanks for sharing. It would be good if the generic commons release doc

Re: [VFS] WIP specific release instructions

sebb wrote: On 5 May 2016 at 17:08, Ralph Goers wrote: > I really don’t know why you are making such a big deal about this. Because it's important that tags are immutable, and to to a lesser degree to avoid creating spurious snapshot builds. Yeah, it's

Re: [VFS] WIP specific release instructions

' RMs. On 4 May 2016 at 04:43, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Here's what I've been doing. The generic instructions are woefully incomplete (before someone chimes in again - no, not just because "VFS is a multi-module project"). I think I have this on point for rc1, so I'm

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

ible solutions, please read the following articles: [ERROR] [Help 1] http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/DependencyResolutionException [ERROR] [ERROR] After correcting the problems, you can resume the build with the command [ERROR] mvn -rf :commons-vfs2 = %< =

Re: [VFS] Disallowed dependencies in build? (was Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0)

Bernd Eckenfels wrote: Am Tue, 03 May 2016 21:47:43 -0400 schrieb Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>: See the original point of me starting this thread: it was stated that the sandbox (might) depend on code which is not licensed in such a manner that is allowed for ASF projects. Which

[VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc1

All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc1). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1163 Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/ r13511 MD5 commons-vfs-distribution-2.1-bin.tar.gz

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

Don't thank me yet, we haven't gotten the release out ;) Gary Gregory wrote: Thanks for RM'ing Josh! We're long overdue for a VFS release. Gary On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: This vote fails with one -1 and nothing else. Going to be trying t

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

This vote fails with one -1 and nothing else. Going to be trying to roll an rc1 with the feedback given so far. Josh Elser wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories

Re: [VFS] Disallowed dependencies in build? (was Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0)

for release (beside we do not want to?) I dont think we should burden such structural and long standing changes onto a voluntary release manager given the 2.0 had the same structure. Gruss Bernd Am Tue, 3 May 2016 15:55:00 +0100 schrieb sebb<seb...@gmail.com>: On 3 May 2016 at 01:43

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: > mvn site:stage is used expressly for this purpose. Maven has no problems > with properly constructed multi-module projects -- it's a fallacy that Maven > cannot handle multi-module projects well. [Since Maven knows it is a multi-module project it should not need a different

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: >> Ideally the duplicate archives should be dropped, but that is not a >> blocker, just a nuisance when reviewing. > > > Yeah, I'll try to figure out what's going on with that when I roll rc1. I'm > not sure since it's not pulling directly from the apache.pom (I'm not sure >

Re: [VFS] Disallowed dependencies in build? (was Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0)

sebb wrote: +1 along with someone to own this and do the proper diligence as a PMC > member to make sure that we're violating policy. It would be easy to_ensure_ a violation ... ! Since sandbox is not ready for release, for the purpose of getting a VFS release out it should be moved to a

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: > Sebb -- would addressing these points in the release notes cause you to > change your -1 to a +1? I'd like to make all the changes I can ASAP and roll > the next RC. Because I haven't said it explicitly -- thanks for taking the > time to give all of the feedback that you have

Re: [VFS] Disallowed dependencies in build? (was Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0)

sebb wrote: On 3 May 2016 at 01:43, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Binaries are not an official release anyways. But that does not mean they can include software that is incompatible with the AL, because end users expect (and we tell them) that the software comes under AL 2.

[VFS] Disallowed dependencies in build? (was Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0)

Binaries are not an official release anyways. Even so, that seems like a *very* scary thing to even have this code checked into the repository if it depends on incompatibly-licensed software. Am I misunderstanding this? e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote: Hello, Agree, the sandbox profile should

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

Josh Elser wrote: sebb wrote: On 2 May 2016 at 15:00, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: > Also, please re-read the end of the previous thread on compatibility. > > I clearly stated that there were some changes which I consider not worth > changing about the TarArchiveEntry

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

the sandbox components. They might have been included in the source distribution though. But these emails make it sound like it is exactly the opposite of what I would have expected. Ralph On May 2, 2016, at 6:35 AM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: The "Downloa

Re: [VFS] JIRA Karma?

Thanks Benedikt! Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hello Josh, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> schrieb am So., 1. Mai 2016 um 21:46 Uhr: Can someone grant me some karma on the VFS project, please? I'll eventually need to some version management, but, even now, it seems like I can't assign an

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs-2.1/index.html mentions Release Notes but the link points to https://archive.apache.org/dist/commons/vfs/RELEASE_NOTES.txt which of course is for2.0. It would be helpful to use the current release notes on the site. Ok, I'll

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: On 2 May 2016 at 15:00, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: > Also, please re-read the end of the previous thread on compatibility. > > I clearly stated that there were some changes which I consider not worth > changing about the TarArchiveEntry code

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

on how the changes should be addressed. Josh Elser wrote: Sebb -- did you actually read the changes? You should note that those are all method additions which we already decided were allowed sebb wrote: I have now found the Clirr Report at http://home.apache.org/~elserj/commons/commons-vfs

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

sebb wrote: The "Download and Build" page is more suitable for developers than end users (especially if it points to trunk, which is not voted on) so should not be the primary download page. Also there seem to be two identical copies of each of the non-Maven release artifacts:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

Josh Elser wrote: Sebb wrote: > Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). > > Maven repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161 The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release items as the above URL i

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

(So sorry, fingers sent too quick) commons-vfs-2.1-bin.tar.gz: MD5 fdaad280f3d3c592df048a58bfa8debd SHA1 edfa8ac8c31e2e4b88898ac2418f9e7a7fe34324 commons-vfs-2.1-bin.zip: MD5 951448d632ff37363c4bd0dcad3a887e SHA1 2fd9262d349f6d62eb34912a7d56d406b7655568 My GPG key is 4677D66C Josh Elser wrote

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

Forgot to include xsum/sig info: commons-vfs-2.1-src.tar.gz: MD5 f768cf5f2d00cfa58b70d221054ca1c9 SHA1 d5a53ecf575e961b2e6b472e8bf5b013b33bfa78 commons-vfs-2.1-src.zip: MD5 2eb6a10883b77ce137a391a7dd341120 SHA1 f831eb7cb62df295ef8b1a090e209550c6ea5c35 Josh Elser wrote: All, Please consider

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

missing from one of them? On 2 May 2016 at 10:40, sebb<seb...@gmail.com> wrote: On 2 May 2016 at 05:28, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/reposi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

ote: On 2 May 2016 at 05:28, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161 The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release it

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

Sebb wrote: > Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). > > Maven repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161 The e-mail should contain the hashes of the release items as the above URL is transitory. The hashes allow

[VOTE] Apache Commons-VFS2 2.1 rc0

All, Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc0). Maven repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1161 Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/vfs/{binaries,source} Staged site:

[VFS] JIRA Karma?

Can someone grant me some karma on the VFS project, please? I'll eventually need to some version management, but, even now, it seems like I can't assign an issue to myself. Thanks in advance. - Josh - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

Also, looks like I'm wrong about the static member moving up to a parent class (WebdavFileProvider to HttpFileProvider). I thought this wouldn't work, but a quick experiment shows that it's fine. Josh Elser wrote: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-377 is the biggest not-easily-fixed

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

e achieved then it reduces the downstream effort needed. On 30 April 2016 at 00:00, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: So, just call 2.1 instead 3.0? Fine by me. Package name becomes o.a.c.vfs3? ArtifactId becomes (variants of) commons-vfs3? Please confirm, Gary. I don't think we nee

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

e. So... the least risky option is (2), which is a 0-risk option. Gary On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Hah, thanks for the details, Ralph. I will be sure to bring myself up to speed. That being said: I would still like to get some consensus fr

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

<ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: On Apr 29, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Ralph Goers wrote: On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:27 AM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>wrote:

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

Ralph Goers wrote: On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:27 AM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>wrote: How does changing the

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 16:19, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing im

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

sebb wrote: On 29 April 2016 at 15:59, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: > How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a > NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing implementation for a new > method? That means we change ALL the package name

Re: [patch] Add elserj to KEYS

Thanks, sebb. That did the trick. sebb wrote: Try again. I added you to the commons unix group On 29 April 2016 at 05:03, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Can someone add my key to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/commons/KEYS, please? It would appear that I lack the re

Re: [VFS] 2.1 clirr report

How does changing the package name help? Doesn't that just push a NoClassDefFound error instead of some missing implementation for a new method? Where do you all define what is public API (and thus what is stated to be stable)? Gary Gregory wrote: We have 2 choices IMO: document breaks or

[patch] Add elserj to KEYS

(working copy) @@ -5520,3 +5520,100 @@ EaWfWeQZ4Q== =b8+3 -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- + +pub 4096R/4677D66C 2013-05-04 +uid Josh Elser (Apache) <els...@apache.org> +sig 34677D66C 2016-04-06 Josh Elser (Apache) <els...@apache.org> +uid

[VFS] 2.1 clirr report

It looks like there are about 7 areas in core/ where compatibility against 2.0 has been broken: * Methods added to o.a.c.v.{FileContent,FileName,FileObject} * Method added to o.a.c.v.RandomAccessContent * Parameters changed on method(s) in o.a.c.v.p.{b.Bzip2FileObject,g.GzipFileObject} *

[VFS] 2.1 release help

Ok, ran into my first issue. Seems like I don't have the karma to edit the existing JIRA issues (changing the fixVersion). Can someone please add me to the appropriate role for the project? - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

nal work. Gruss Bernd Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:01 -0400 schrieb Josh Elser <els...@apache.org <mailto:els...@apache.org>>: > Thanks Matt and Gary. > > I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

easier to just blow away the target directory and start over than it is to revert stuff from scm. Ralph On Apr 27, 2016, at 8:31 AM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks, Sebb and Ralph. I can dig through the parent poms. I wouldn't have initially re

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

to target/deploy and compare the two. You may need to use 'mvn package deploy' rather than plain 'mvn deploy' if the VFS pom creates any jars in the package phase. Ralph On Apr 26, 2016, at 3:27 PM, Bernd Eckenfels<e...@zusammenkunft.net> wrote: Hello, see inline. Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:05:01 -0

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

Hello, see inline. Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:05:01 -0400 schrieb Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>: Thanks for the great details, Bernd. Some questions/comments: I hadn't even stumbled across VFS-570 due to its lack of fixVersion=2.1. Are there more that need to be correctly tagged which

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

additional work. Gruss Bernd Am Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:01 -0400 schrieb Josh Elser<els...@apache.org>: Thanks Matt and Gary. I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also applies to commons-*. Thanks for bringing that up. Specifically though, I am only interested in cutting

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

2.1. Josh Elser wrote: Thanks Matt and Gary. I do recall seeing the asf-wide note that my commit-bit also applies to commons-*. Thanks for bringing that up. Specifically though, I am only interested in cutting a release -- if we can get a new release cut that we can use downstream, that increases

Re: [VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

r 25, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote: Hi all, There are presently 171 resolved issues sitting in commons-vfs2 2.1-SNAPSHOT, with 4 outstanding (none of which look like blockers to me). The lack of any release of commons-vfs2 in years has been a big problem downstr

[VFS] 2.1 Release Plan

Hi all, There are presently 171 resolved issues sitting in commons-vfs2 2.1-SNAPSHOT, with 4 outstanding (none of which look like blockers to me). The lack of any release of commons-vfs2 in years has been a big problem downstream. This past weekend, I was again annoyed by bugs that have