+1
regards,
Karl
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework
(http://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/OSGITEST/OSGi+testing+framework
), and found nothing bad.
It's a shame about the new OSGi-provided filter implementation, by the
way...
Angelo
On 7 Sep
2009/9/10 Angelo van der Sijpt angelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework (
http://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/OSGITEST/OSGi+testing+framework
), and found nothing bad.
It's a shame about the new
On 9/9/09 12:54, Angelo van der Sijpt wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework
(http://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/OSGITEST/OSGi+testing+framework
), and found nothing bad.
It's a shame about the new OSGi-provided filter
On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
On 9/9/09 12:54, Angelo van der Sijpt wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework
(http://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/OSGITEST/OSGi+testing+framework
), and found nothing bad.
2009/9/10 Angelo van der Sijpt angelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl
On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
On 9/9/09 12:54, Angelo van der Sijpt wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework (
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Angelo van der
Sijptangelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework
(http://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/OSGITEST/OSGi+testing+framework
), and found nothing bad.
I would
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Stuart McCullochmccu...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/10 Angelo van der Sijpt angelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl
On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
On 9/9/09 12:54, Angelo van der Sijpt wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release
+1
Thanks for the great efforts !
Regards
Felix
Karl Pauls schrieb:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
Staging
On 9 Sep 2009, at 20:38, Karl Pauls wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Angelo van der
Sijptangelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing framework
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Angelo van der
Sijptangelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl wrote:
On 9 Sep 2009, at 20:38, Karl Pauls wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Angelo van der
Sijptangelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi
On Sep 9, 2009, at 8:02 PM, Stuart McCulloch wrote:
2009/9/10 Angelo van der Sijpt angelo.vandersi...@luminis.nl
On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
On 9/9/09 12:54, Angelo van der Sijpt wrote:
+1 (very non-authoritive)
We checked the new release against our OSGi testing
Yeah, that sounds reasonable. I've left the import but it's now commented.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 07:48, Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org wrote:
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Ok, I've just committed the change, but I'm happy to roll it back if
people
prefer.
I would prefer to not have
+1 (not binding)
2009/9/8 Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
+1
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziege...@apache.org
--
Toni Menzel
Independent Software Developer
Professional Profile: http://okidokiteam.com
t...@okidokiteam.com
http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS
This should still work. If you have a test case, then create an issue. I
will also try to do something similar soon too, so I will try to see if
it works for me.
- richard
On 09/08/2009 11:01 AM, Clement Escoffier wrote:
+1,
Just a strange behavior (ClassCastException) when a host
+1
--
Chris Custine
FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call
-0 Due to the concurrency issues I'm seeing in Felix. Not -1 because
these issues are in 1.8.1 as well, so I guess it is no worse then that
GA release.
Don
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
+1 (not binding)
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 2:53 AM, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
+1
--
Filippo Diotalevi
+1
2009/9/7 Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
Staging repository:
The gpg signatures looks bad from the output of check_staged_release.
Did you release using maven 2.1 ? Or is it just that the script does not
import the keys ?
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 01:53, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
Right that was it, I would suggest adding the following to the script:
wget http://www.apache.org/dist/felix/KEYS
gpg --import KEYS
Anyway, +1 from me
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 11:14, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
The gpg signatures looks bad from the output of check_staged_release.
Hi,
Guillaume Nodet schrieb:
Right that was it, I would suggest adding the following to the script:
wget http://www.apache.org/dist/felix/KEYS
gpg --import KEYS
While I agree, that this is certainly easy from a use point of view, I
generally also don't like automated KEY import - in fact I
Ok, I've just committed the change, but I'm happy to roll it back if people
prefer.
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 11:24, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Guillaume Nodet schrieb:
Right that was it, I would suggest adding the following to the script:
wget
+1
- richard
On 9/6/09 19:53, Karl Pauls wrote:
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
Staging repository:
+1
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziege...@apache.org
+1
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
Staging repository:
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Ok, I've just committed the change, but I'm happy to roll it back if people
prefer.
I would prefer to not have the import in the script. I rather would like
to have
full control of what I'm importing - and in this case, you usually need
to import the relevant keys only
I would like to call a vote on the following subproject releases:
org.osgi.core 1.4.0 *
org.osgi.compendium 1.4.0 *
shell 1.4.0
shell.tui 1.4.0
bundlerepository 1.4.1
framework 2.0.0
main 2.0.0
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/felix-staging-044//
You
30 matches
Mail list logo
