Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-25 Thread Willem Jiang
+1, Willem On 2/24/11 4:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE containers. List of issues: https://issues.apac

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-24 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
+1. Colm. On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Glen Mazza wrote: > +1 > > Glen > > On 2/23/2011 6:23 PM, Eric Johnson wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Sergey Beryozkin >>  wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> thanks, Sergey >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp  wrote: >>>

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-24 Thread Glen Mazza
+1 Glen On 2/23/2011 6:23 PM, Eric Johnson wrote: +1 On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: +1 thanks, Sergey On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2

RE: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-24 Thread Sean O'Callaghan
+1 -Original Message- From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dk...@apache.org] Sent: 23 February 2011 20:31 To: dev@cxf.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3 We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventin

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-24 Thread Alessio Soldano
+1 Alessio On 02/23/2011 09:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE containers. List of issues: https://issues.a

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-24 Thread Tomasz Oponowicz
+1 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Freeman Fang wrote: > +1 > > Freeman > On 2011-2-24, at 上午4:30, Daniel Kulp wrote: > >> >> >> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2.   Thus, we really should get >> 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from >> being used as a  

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread Freeman Fang
+1 Freeman On 2011-2-24, at 上午4:30, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE containers. List of issues: https://iss

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread Dennis Sosnoski
+1 - Dennis On 02/24/2011 09:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 > out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used > as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE > containers. > > > List of issue

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread Jim Ma
+1 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:47 AM, UlhasBhole wrote: > +1, > > -- Ulhas Bhole > On 23 Feb 2011, at 20:30, Daniel Kulp wrote: > >> >> >> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2.   Thus, we really should get >> 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from >> being us

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread UlhasBhole
+1, -- Ulhas Bhole On 23 Feb 2011, at 20:30, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > > We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 > out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used > as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE > containers. > > > L

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread Eric Johnson
+1 On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: > +1 > > thanks, Sergey > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: >> >> >> We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2.   Thus, we really should get >> 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-23 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
+1 thanks, Sergey On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > > We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2.   Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 > out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used > as a  JAX-WS implementation for J2EE > containers. > > > Li