[RESULT][VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-12 Thread Daniel Kulp
We have 11 +1 votes. We do have a -0 vote related to CXF-7175, but it doesn’t look like something that should hold up the release as there is still confusion over what the problem is. Thus, this vote passes. I’ll release the artifacts. Dan > On Dec 9, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-12 Thread John Poth
+1 (non-binding) camel-cxf is green John. On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: > +1. > > Colm. > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Alessio Soldano > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Il 09/12/2016 21:47, Daniel Kulp ha scritto: > > > >> Since there are severa

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-12 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
+1. Colm. On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Alessio Soldano wrote: > +1 > > Thanks > > > Il 09/12/2016 21:47, Daniel Kulp ha scritto: > >> Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be >> good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF >> 3.1.9 a

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-12 Thread Alessio Soldano
+1 Thanks Il 09/12/2016 21:47, Daniel Kulp ha scritto: Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12. Staging areas: 3.1.9: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/org

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-12 Thread Christian Schneider
Would it be ok to tackle this in the next bugfix release and maybe get it out a little quicker? (Like 2-3 weeks instead of the usual 4 weeks) Christian On 11.12.2016 17:27, John D. Ament wrote: No, I -0'd a release because something's busted. I raised the PR to fix that busted thing. John O

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread Mark Struberg
It's a bug in Weld but I would still change it as your handling is better and also beneficial for OWB. Weld team claims that BeanClass is actually only for determining the visibility. Still they also base other decisions on that type (as does OWB). I wanted to change/clarify this in the spec but

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
2016-12-11 17:28 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament : > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM Romain Manni-Bucau > > wrote: > > > Le 11 déc. 2016 17:03, "Jeff Genender" a écrit : > > > > You -0’d a release because the pull request that you submitted at > 12/11/16 > > 15:30 GMT didn’t make it into a release whos

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread John D. Ament
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Le 11 déc. 2016 17:03, "Jeff Genender" a écrit : > > You -0’d a release because the pull request that you submitted at 12/11/16 > 15:30 GMT didn’t make it into a release whose vote was kicked off nearly 42 > hours before at 12/9/16 21:

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread John D. Ament
No, I -0'd a release because something's busted. I raised the PR to fix that busted thing. John On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:03 AM Jeff Genender wrote: > You -0’d a release because the pull request that you submitted at 12/11/16 > 15:30 GMT didn’t make it into a release whose vote was kicked off

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
Le 11 déc. 2016 17:03, "Jeff Genender" a écrit : You -0’d a release because the pull request that you submitted at 12/11/16 15:30 GMT didn’t make it into a release whose vote was kicked off nearly 42 hours before at 12/9/16 21:47 GMT? In particukar since it is a bug in weld not cxf as Mark point

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread Jeff Genender
You -0’d a release because the pull request that you submitted at 12/11/16 15:30 GMT didn’t make it into a release whose vote was kicked off nearly 42 hours before at 12/9/16 21:47 GMT? Seriously? Jeff > On Dec 11, 2016, at 7:16 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > I did find one issue. Its not a

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread Mark Struberg
+1 for 3.1.9 (nb) source ok, meecrowave and tomee runs fine and my other tests as well. txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 09.12.2016 um 21:47 schrieb Daniel Kulp : > > Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good > to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a v

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-11 Thread John D. Ament
I did find one issue. Its not a new issue, but the CDI integration changes made the problem more profound when using CXF + Weld in an Arquillian test. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7175 So -0 since I won't be able to upgrade yet. On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 3:47 PM Daniel Kulp wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-10 Thread Christian Schneider
+1 Christian 2016-12-10 19:51 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò : > On 9 Dec 2016 21:47:05 CET, Daniel Kulp wrote: > >Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be > >good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF > >3.1.9 and 3.0.12. > > > >Stag

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-10 Thread Francesco Chicchiriccò
On 9 Dec 2016 21:47:05 CET, Daniel Kulp wrote: >Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be >good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF >3.1.9 and 3.0.12. > >Staging areas: >3.1.9: >https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-10 Thread Jeff Genender
+1 Jeff > On Dec 9, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good > to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF 3.1.9 and > 3.0.12. > > Staging areas: > 3.1.9: > https://repository.apache.org/conte

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-10 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
+1, meecrowave is green :) Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-10 Thread Andriy Redko
+1 Andriy DK> Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12. DK> Staging areas: DK> 3.1.9: DK> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-1083/ DK> 3.0.12: DK>

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-09 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
+1 Sergey On 09/12/16 20:47, Daniel Kulp wrote: Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12. Staging areas: 3.1.9: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecx

[VOTE] CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12

2016-12-09 Thread Daniel Kulp
Since there are several folks waiting for this release and it would be good to get it out before the holidays, I’d like to call a vote for CXF 3.1.9 and 3.0.12. Staging areas: 3.1.9: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-1083/ 3.0.12: https://repository.apache.org/conte