On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:53 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 10 September 2010 08:30, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Seb,
>> thanks for your feedbacks. The problem I have is that even if I omit
>> the password waiting for the prompt, once the builds arrives ad the
>> gpg:sign execution, it is completely block
On 10 September 2010 08:30, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Seb,
> thanks for your feedbacks. The problem I have is that even if I omit
> the password waiting for the prompt, once the builds arrives ad the
> gpg:sign execution, it is completely blocked :(
> I'm using gpg 1.4.9, shall I have to upgrade
Hi Seb,
thanks for your feedbacks. The problem I have is that even if I omit
the password waiting for the prompt, once the builds arrives ad the
gpg:sign execution, it is completely blocked :(
I'm using gpg 1.4.9, shall I have to upgrade to 2?
Many thanks in advance, have a nice day,
Simo
http://p
On 9 September 2010 19:54, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> I'm trying to push an RC release, but the gpg plugin execution is
> blocked when signing arifacts :( Follow below my attempts:
>
> mvn release:prepare -DdryRun=true -Darguments=-Dgpg.keyname=\
> -Dgpg.passphrase=
> mvn relea
Hi all guys,
I'm trying to push an RC release, but the gpg plugin execution is
blocked when signing arifacts :( Follow below my attempts:
mvn release:prepare -DdryRun=true -Darguments=-Dgpg.keyname=\
-Dgpg.passphrase=
mvn release:prepare -DdryRun=true -Dgpg.passphrase= (the keyname
is
Hi Rahul,
don't worry I won't publish the site before the release; about the
Menu reorganization I like the b) too, it is much more coherent with
previous releases.
Thanks a lot, have a nice day,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 6:23 PM
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all, Rahul,
> what about the latest deployed website?
Looks good overall, though I haven't taken a fine-toothed comb to it.
> Can I proceed modifying the
> homepage in order to propose a release?
Sure, but please don't deploy it afte
Hi all, Rahul,
what about the latest deployed website? Can I proceed modifying the
homepage in order to propose a release?
Thanks in advance, all the best,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 4
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Rahul,
> thanks a lot for your feedbacks, actions have been completed following
> your suggestions.
> my final 2 questions:
> - I didn't find any reference on wiki about
> ${commons.deployment.protocol}... can we have a private chat?
Sur
Hi Rahul,
thanks a lot for your feedbacks, actions have been completed following
your suggestions.
my final 2 questions:
- I didn't find any reference on wiki about
${commons.deployment.protocol}... can we have a private chat?
- Is it the case to migrate the group id to org.apache.commons?
Many tha
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Sorry,
> forgot to ask your opinion on dropping the STATUS.html[1] file that
> seems has not been updated anymore since 1.7 release... WDYT?
Yup, lets scrap that.
-Rahul
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi again Rahul, all,
> just to ask opinions about other details: I'd move the checkstyle
> stuff (checkstyle.xml and file-header.txt), on the project root, to a
> proper src/test/checkstyle dir to keep the root dir as much clean as
> possible
Sorry,
forgot to ask your opinion on dropping the STATUS.html[1] file that
seems has not been updated anymore since 1.7 release... WDYT?
Thanks in advance,
Simo
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/digester/trunk/STATUS.html
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99sof
Hi again Rahul, all,
just to ask opinions about other details: I'd move the checkstyle
stuff (checkstyle.xml and file-header.txt), on the project root, to a
proper src/test/checkstyle dir to keep the root dir as much clean as
possible, removing verification tools configuration and keep metadata
bui
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll follow the path you showed me!
thanks a lot,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Simone Tripodi
> wrote:
>> Hi Rahul,
>> thanks a lot!!! I
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi Rahul,
> thanks a lot!!! I just need to fix the svn cp we discussed in the
> other thread, write the release notes and I'll be ready to calla a
> vote.
Two suggestions:
* Digester release notes have been written by hand (rather than
ge
Hi Rahul,
thanks a lot!!! I just need to fix the svn cp we discussed in the
other thread, write the release notes and I'll be ready to calla a
vote.
I'll use the m2 rc profile, I'm already used to do it with the release
plugin and found it comfortable.
Have a nice day,m
Simo
http://people.apache.o
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Rahul,
> thanks for your feedbacks!!! :)
> At that point I'd try to call a vote for a new release, WDYT? Can you
> point me please at some wiki page where described the release
> procedure?
Depends who is cutting the release. We have atl
Hi Rahul,
thanks for your feedbacks!!! :)
At that point I'd try to call a vote for a new release, WDYT? Can you
point me please at some wiki page where described the release
procedure?
Many thanks in advance, have a nice day!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi again,
> I've been fixing PMD-CPD-Checkstyle errors, by now PMD warnings could
> be considered trivial since they're detected on Deprecated
> methods/constructor, there is a CPD warning I'd like to fix:
>
> File
Hi again,
I've been fixing PMD-CPD-Checkstyle errors, by now PMD warnings could
be considered trivial since they're detected on Deprecated
methods/constructor, there is a CPD warning I'd like to fix:
FileLine
org/apache/commons/di
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all,
> just to give you a brief recap of the completed actions:
> - tests have been migrated to JUnit 4;
> - project structure has been moved to default Maven archetype structure;
> - ant build & config have been removed;
> - whole documen
Hi all,
just to give you a brief recap of the completed actions:
- tests have been migrated to JUnit 4;
- project structure has been moved to default Maven archetype structure;
- ant build & config have been removed;
- whole documentation has been moved to site, in the xdoc format.
There still is
Unfortunately they are just components mocks used in proper unit
tests, they don't contain test methods, so 1) should be the better
solution.
Thanks Seb!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:50 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 1 September 2010 09:2
On 1 September 2010 09:24, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi guys,
> migrating to Junit4 I met a small issue that can be easily resolved in
> more that 1 way, I'd like to discuss with you how we want doing it:
>
> Tests in error:
> initializationError(org.apache.commons.digester.xmlrules.TestDigesterRul
Hi guys,
migrating to Junit4 I met a small issue that can be easily resolved in
more that 1 way, I'd like to discuss with you how we want doing it:
Tests in error:
initializationError(org.apache.commons.digester.xmlrules.TestDigesterRulesSource)
initializationError(org.apache.commons.digester
Thanks a lot guys,
now the scope is much more clear to me. I'll proceed according to what
we agreed.
Have a nice day!!!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:22 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 31 August 2010 22:54, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
>> On Tue,
On 31 August 2010 22:54, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Simone Tripodi
> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> one more question: what about keeping or removing the Test
>> classes/methods that just declare the Suite? AFAIK are not more
>> needed...
>
>
> Don't have a strong opinion --
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:12 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 31 August 2010 19:29, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Seb,
>> thanks for your feedbacks, always appreciated! I know and understand
>> the need of having the package.html files, but what do you think about
>> replacing them with the package-info.java f
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi guys,
> one more question: what about keeping or removing the Test
> classes/methods that just declare the Suite? AFAIK are not more
> needed...
Don't have a strong opinion -- if someone wants to do it.
-Rahul
> Thanks in advance,
>
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:02 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 31 August 2010 14:39, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Rahul,
>> I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the
>> package.html files.
>
Nice. BTW, you can even deploy the site if you mark the menu heading
as "Guide (SVN latest)"
On 31 August 2010 19:29, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Seb,
> thanks for your feedbacks, always appreciated! I know and understand
> the need of having the package.html files, but what do you think about
> replacing them with the package-info.java files? It should be the
> same, or not? I've been wor
Hi guys,
one more question: what about keeping or removing the Test
classes/methods that just declare the Suite? AFAIK are not more
needed...
Thanks in advance,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi Seb,
Hi Seb,
thanks for your feedbacks, always appreciated! I know and understand
the need of having the package.html files, but what do you think about
replacing them with the package-info.java files? It should be the
same, or not? I've been working with them and found it very
comfortables.
I'll start
On 31 August 2010 17:02, sebb wrote:
> On 31 August 2010 14:39, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> Hi Rahul,
>> I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the
>> package.html files.
>
> The package.html files are normally used to annotate the Javadoc output.
>
> However in this case thes
On 31 August 2010 14:39, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Rahul,
> I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the
> package.html files.
The package.html files are normally used to annotate the Javadoc output.
However in this case these files have got a lot more content than is
norma
Hi Rahul,
I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the
package.html files. Do you think these last can be removed, since
would be redundant with the new developers guide? At this stage, we
should maintain two different data sources with same information, I'd
propose to drop the
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi All guys,
> since the Commons PMC awarded me giving me the writing rights, I'd
> like to work on the Digester to publish a new release, since a new
> feature will be contained.
Super!
> For what I can see, there are few build-related
Hi All guys,
since the Commons PMC awarded me giving me the writing rights, I'd
like to work on the Digester to publish a new release, since a new
feature will be contained.
For what I can see, there are few build-related minor issues:
- ant build: dropped in Gump, do we want to maintain it or com
39 matches
Mail list logo
