On 18 August 2011 17:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
* Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add
Without the package name change, would it be a drop in replacement?
Aside from changes for providers that is. I am wondering what this
would look like for clients only.
Gary
On Aug 21, 2011, at 8:33, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 August 2011 17:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
If someone else wants to post the vote results while I'm in the air I'm fine
with that too.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 21, 2011, at 11:31 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'm traveling today and will post the vote results when I arrive at my
destination later tonight.
On 8/18/11 9:25 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
* Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
instructions.
I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
On the website:
This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
(pretty much):
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/site/commons-vfs2-examples/index.html
Clirr reports would be nice to show the API change. You'll have
Notes below.
On Aug 20, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
On the website:
This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
(pretty much):
On 20 August 2011 21:54, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll try to dig deeper, but don't wait on me.
On the website:
This is a bad page. A user clicks 'examples' and gets a blank page
(pretty much):
None were blockers btw.
The only really important one is:
Mention the package name change on the frontpage. Also that this means
you can run both versions side by side.
Did you read the News section? Isn't that clear?
And the answer there is nope, didn't see it. Eyes weren't working. :)
Le 18/08/2011 18:25, Ralph Goers a écrit :
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the web site.
* Updated README.txt to remove the existing text and add very basic build
instructions.
+1
All points I mentioned for the last RC have been addressed. Everything
looks good!
Oliver
Am 18.08.2011 18:25, schrieb Ralph Goers:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Removed the sandbox project from the delivery, except for the
Hi All:
I am not sure if I am building correctly, but here is what I found. Some
build instructions in the readme.txt file would help.
Downloaded source zip from
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/staged/
From the root I ran mvn site which did not work. Fine, starting to poke
around.
What do you mean It did not work? This is a multi-project site so in
general mvn site is useless. You have to run mvn site:stage-deply
-DstagingSiteURL=file url where I want the site to go. I suppose I could
add that to the readme, but it is documented pretty well on the maven site
plugin web
Oh - and if for some non-obvious reason you want to create the distribution
jars when you do the build you can run
mvn -P apache-release clean install.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:35 AM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Oops. That should be mvn site:stage-deploy.
On 17 August 2011 19:37, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Oh - and if for some non-obvious reason you want to create the distribution
jars when you do the build you can run
mvn -P apache-release clean install.
I though commons normally use their own release
The Maven release plugin uses the apache-release profile which is set up in
the apache parent pom.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:49 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 August 2011 19:37, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Oh - and if for some non-obvious
Commons parent has both a release profile and an apache-release profile.
The apache-release profile is used by the release plugin as it is set up for
the ASF. I'm not sure what value-add (or value loss) the release profile
provides.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:12 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
On 8/17/11 11:32 AM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com wrote:
What do you mean It did not work? This is a multi-project site so in
general mvn site is useless. You have to run mvn site:stage-deply
-DstagingSiteURL=file url where I want the site to go. I suppose I could
add that to the readme, but
The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
and moved it to core. The only real description is on the web site under
File Systems where it says they under in development (not by me :-) ).
None
Build is now successful under Windows 7 with Java 1.5 and 1.6. Artifacts
and site look good.
The only thing I am missing are md5 files. Are they required (other
components used to have them)? If not, you can count my +1.
Oliver
Am 17.08.2011 07:44, schrieb Ralph Goers:
This is a vote to
On 8/17/11 12:45 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
Build is now successful under Windows 7 with Java 1.5 and 1.6.
Artifacts and site look good.
The only thing I am missing are md5 files. Are they required
(other components used to have them)? If not, you can count my +1.
The md5s are required and we
Nope. That is my mistake. Maven generated them when it uploaded them to the
Nexus staging repo. But I deleted that since we don't deliver them from
there. I then uploaded the artifacts from where they were built on my
machine to the directory on people.a.o rather than grabbing them from Nexus,
On 8/17/11 12:43 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com wrote:
The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
and moved it to core. The only real description is on the web site under
File Systems
OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the README
in a few hours after I get home from work and send out another release vote.
In the meantime, if there are any other problems that should be corrected
I'd appreciate the feedback.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:05 PM,
Le 17/08/2011 22:13, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com a écrit :
OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the README
in a few hours after I get home from work and send out another release vote.
Was this vote offocially cancelled ?
Luc
In the meantime, if there are any
Sorry, yes.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Luc Maisonobe luc.maison...@free.frwrote:
Le 17/08/2011 22:13, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com a écrit :
OK. I will take care of this, the MD5 issue and do something with the
README
in a few hours after I get home from work and send out
On 17 August 2011 20:43, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
The sandbox question I can't answer very well. The sandbox stuff was there
long before I arrived to work on VFS, although I rewrote the webdav stuff
and moved it to core. The only real description is on the
On 17 August 2011 20:55, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Nope. That is my mistake. Maven generated them when it uploaded them to the
Nexus staging repo. But I deleted that since we don't deliver them from
there. I then uploaded the artifacts from where they were
I didn't check, but for some reason I assumed that once I do a close that
I wouldn't be able to delete anything. But you are correct. I can do that so
I will as it is easier.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:51 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 August 2011 20:55, ralph.goers
I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
it from the web site.
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 August 2011 20:43, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
The sandbox question I can't answer
On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
it from the web site.
But then surely source archive builds will fail?
Ralph
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, sebb
On Aug 17, 2011, at 3:27 PM, sebb wrote:
On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
it from the web site.
But then surely source archive builds will fail?
Yeah. I'll
On 18 August 2011 01:09, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Aug 17, 2011, at 3:27 PM, sebb wrote:
On 17 August 2011 23:17, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'd prefer to not remove it from the modules list as that will also remove
it from the web
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
incompatible API change
Yes.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:07 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were reviewed and those
When building the source distribution I get the following error:
Tests run: 975, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
[INFO] [jar:jar {execution: default-jar}]
[INFO]
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO]
On 14 August 2011 17:09, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, the source zip has a dist folder with a pom.xml in it. Not a
blocker but should be fixed.
I think that's intentional - it's the distribution module, which is also in SVN.
Gary
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ralph
Why? The source has a dist directory with a pom.xml in it. I thought the
source zip was supposed to capture what was tagged?
Ralph
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
FWIW, the source zip has a dist folder with a pom.xml in it. Not a
blocker but should be fixed.
Gary
On
Interesting. That is the same error that Continuum reported. I have no idea
what it is and can't seem reproduce it on my MacBook. I will give it a try on
Ubuntu.
The surefire report will look strange. This is a multi-module project. You need
to go to the Core component to see real reports.
My mistake then.
Gary
On Aug 14, 2011, at 12:28, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Why? The source has a dist directory with a pom.xml in it. I thought the
source zip was supposed to capture what was tagged?
Ralph
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
FWIW, the
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
incompatible API change
Thanks, Sebb. See below.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were
On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Thanks, Sebb. See below.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the
On Aug 14, 2011, at 10:09 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Thanks, Sebb. See below.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache
On 14 August 2011 18:49, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Aug 14, 2011, at 10:09 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 18:03, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Thanks, Sebb. See below.
On Aug 14, 2011, at 9:50 AM, sebb wrote:
On 14 August 2011 16:25, Ralph Goers
Ralph Goers wrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
directly from maven has ever met my expectations in terms of formatting
On Dec 23, 2010, at 12:11 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Ralph Goers wrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
directly from maven
On 22 December 2010 07:43, Jörg Schaible joerg.schai...@scalaris.com wrote:
Hi,
Phil Steitz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
On Dec 21, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
But the RM should definitely *look at* the generated release notes and,
IMO, intentionally committing them is a good thing. Nothing generated
directly from maven has ever met my expectations in terms of formatting
and
content, so I have
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I have modified the release packaging so that the binary release includes
release notes generated by the maven-changes-plugin announcement generator.
I've excluded doap_vfs.rdf from the src zip, although it isn't clear to
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote
I have not included release notes in the src zip since my understanding is
the src zip should contain the directories pretty much as they exist in SVN.
Instead I have added a
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote
I have not included release notes in the src zip since my understanding
is the src zip should
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote
I have not included
On Dec 21, 2010, at 18:49, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph Goers
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On 21 December 2010 05:21, Ralph
Hi,
Phil Steitz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2010 00:11, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ralph Goers
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Dec 21, 2010, at 2:55 PM, sebb wrote:
On
I have modified the release packaging so that the binary release includes
release notes generated by the maven-changes-plugin announcement generator.
I've excluded doap_vfs.rdf from the src zip, although it isn't clear to me why
this is necessary, especially if there is some Maven plugin
Hi Ralph:
While the src distro ran the Maven test goal OK for me on Vista + Java 6, I see
that no tests ran (0% success rate) according to
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/surefire-report.html
How can that be?
Gary Gregory
Senior Software Engineer
Rocket Software
3340 Peachtree
On 6 December 2010 02:04, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were reviewed and those that required a possibly
incompatible API change
On Dec 6, 2010, at 10:49, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 December 2010 02:04, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the package name was changed from vfs to vfs2. Many
of the Jira issues were reviewed and
On Dec 6, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Hi Ralph:
While the src distro ran the Maven test goal OK for me on Vista + Java 6, I
see that no tests ran (0% success rate) according to
http://people.apache.org/~rgoers/commons-vfs/surefire-report.html
How can that be?
VFS is a
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Ralph Goers wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
LargeTarTestCase has been added to the test-data
incompatible changes and package names (was: Re:
[VOTE]
Release Commons VFS 2.0)
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making
it 1.x if there are no compat breaks.
So, how about now
+1 release it
I don't like using a build named commons-vfs-20070611.jar because no
official release exists...
Also, if VFS2 isn't backward compatible and lists all changes to make during
upgrade, we should consider patching FileContentInputStream to return false
in method markSupported()
See
On 7 November 2010 02:17, Gary Gregory ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I
...@seagullsoftware.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them
later.
Yes, release early, release often.
I would encourage work to proceed immediately to implement this,
generics
:17, Gary Gregory ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has
:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around
ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we
, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them
later.
Yes, release early, release often.
I would encourage work to proceed immediately
02:17, Gary Gregoryggreg...@seagullsoftware.com
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings
-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:
henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always
I've just run Clirr on VFS 2.0 (had to cheat and change the Maven
GroupId). There are quite a few errors, which mean that the code is
not binary compatible:
ERROR: 7012: org.apache.commons.vfs.FileContent: Method 'public
boolean hasAttribute(java.lang.String)' has been added to an interface
On Nov 7, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
I would suggest that we (and in fact I started hacking around with
this) release a vfs2 which is Java6+ only and fully generified.
I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
FileSystem abstraction.
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making
it 1.x if there are no compat breaks.
So, how about now that we know there are compat breaks? I would -1
the release now that we know the API is
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/7/10 8:19 PM, James Carman wrote:
So you think that if there is no API break, then you don't bump major
version numbers? So what about vfs 2.0? Would you vote against it?
I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Is the goal to never do a release?
No, the goal is to not rush a release just to get something out there.
If we will be knowingly setting our users up for failure (or worse
jar hell), then I don't want to do a
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:18 PM, James Carman wrote:
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
Is the goal to never do a release?
No, the goal is to not rush a release just to get something out there.
If we will be knowingly setting our users up for
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
If this is rushing I'd hate to see slow. Releasing VFS 2.0 has been discussed
several times over the last year or more. None of this is new information.
Rushing as in doing something before it's time to do it, not
I'd say that Java7 is still at least 12 months out and another 6-12
months to general adoption.
-h
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 17:41, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Nov 7, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
I would suggest that we (and in fact I started hacking
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
FileSystem abstraction.
http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/nio/file/package-summary.html.
I would think VFS 3.0 would
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:49 PM, James Carman wrote:
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
I'm not sure whether I agree. I think I mentioned that Java 7 has a new
FileSystem abstraction.
-Original Message-
From: jcar...@carmanconsulting.com [mailto:jcar...@carmanconsulting.com] On
Behalf Of James Carman
Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 18:14
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: Backwards incompatible changes and package names (was: Re: [VOTE]
Release Commons VFS
Ralph Goers wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
LargeTarTestCase has been added to the test-data directory, greatly
On 5 November 2010 20:12, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the jdk version has been changed to 1.5 and the
requirement has been added to the web site main page. The test file for
LargeTarTestCase has
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still around, we can always remove them later.
-h
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 13:12, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Since the last candidate the jdk version
-Original Message-
From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:henn...@schmiedehausen.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 19:03
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons VFS 2.0
+1
- I don't think that has warnings is a problem
- If deprecated APIs are still
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[ ] -1 no, do not release it because...
Ralph
tag:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[X] -1 no, do not release it because...
The code has a dependency on Commons NET 2.0, which requires Java 1.5+
However VFS
On 5 November 2010 09:49, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[X] -1 no, do not release it because...
The code has a dependency
On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:00 AM, sebb wrote:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[ ] -1 no, do not release it because...
Ralph
tag:
On Nov 5, 2010, at 3:03 AM, sebb wrote:
On 5 November 2010 09:49, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[X] -1 no, do not
On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:49 AM, sebb wrote:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[X] -1 no, do not release it because...
The code has a dependency on Commons
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Do you really consider this to be a -1? I consider this to be a
documentation issue. User's can pick and choose which providers they want
and simply need to be aware that Net 2.0 requires 1.5.
The providers
Hi James,
James Carman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
Do you really consider this to be a -1? I consider this to be a
documentation issue. User's can pick and choose which providers they
want and simply need to be aware that Net 2.0
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Jörg Schaible joerg.schai...@gmx.de wrote:
This is not the point. If they add net 2.0 to the classpath they are using
Java 5 probably anyway. The interesting quesiton is, what happens if net 1.4
is on the classpath? I'd guess the provider is also
On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi James,
James Carman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
Do you really consider this to be a -1? I consider this to be a
documentation issue. User's can pick and choose which
On 5 November 2010 15:30, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:49 AM, sebb wrote:
On 5 November 2010 03:05, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
[ ] +1 release it
[ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
[X] -1
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
If so, what about someone using Java 1.4 - can they update to VFS 2.0,
but keep the FTP support from NET 1.4?
Or will they lose FTP support entirely?
FTP support works without Net at all. I just ran a test client and
excluded
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
