Did this get rolled at all? If so, where can we download it?
Mark
Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
+1
I didn't have time to fix MSITE-683 but will work on it this WE too:
we should
have a working m-site-p 3.3-SNAPSHOT at the time Maven 3.1.0-alpha-1
is out
Regards,
Hervé
Le jeudi 21 mars 2013
Nope, I just got off a plane. I'll cut it in the morning.
But you can build from master, it will be the same :-)
On Mar 24, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Mark Derricutt m...@talios.com wrote:
Did this get rolled at all? If so, where can we download it?
Mark
Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
+1
I didn't
+1
I didn't have time to fix MSITE-683 but will work on it this WE too: we should
have a working m-site-p 3.3-SNAPSHOT at the time Maven 3.1.0-alpha-1 is out
Regards,
Hervé
Le jeudi 21 mars 2013 19:30:20 Jason van Zyl a écrit :
If no one objects I'm going to roll a release of 3.1.0-alpha-1
If no one objects I'm going to roll a release of 3.1.0-alpha-1 over the
weekend. There are plugins that don't work but I think those can be sorted out
over a few alphas. Being alpha will make it clear it's not for the faint of
heart.
Thanks,
Jason
+1 Look forward to giving this a harsh bashing and a shaking!
Jason van Zyl wrote:
If no one objects I'm going to roll a release of 3.1.0-alpha-1 over
the weekend. There are plugins that don't work but I think those can
be sorted out over a few alphas. Being alpha will make it clear it's
I will have a go at it with the android maven plugin and fix what I can..
manfred
+1 Look forward to giving this a harsh bashing and a shaking!
Jason van Zyl wrote:
If no one objects I'm going to roll a release of 3.1.0-alpha-1 over
the weekend. There are plugins that don't work but I
+1 on giving people one week from the Jason's initial mail in this thread.
Will the release be a RC or the real deal? We've had this discussion before
and I honestly don't remember what we decided, but I think cutting a RC
first for core is good. So maybe cut a RC now and have us/people test that
Hi Jason,
I can help in the analysis. I recently written some annotation
checking tool in japa (javaparser) and ASM :) Do you want to analyze
the source code or the class files?
Regards,
g
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.fr wrote:
Did you finally tried full
As I posted previously I would like to do the 3.1.0 release but I don't want to
do the work of isolating SLF4J until it's shown that it will be a problem. I
don't the believe the adoption of 3.1.0 is going to be so quick that we can't
create a fix if necessary. I would rather do the release in
I would propose that we give until this time next week for somebody to
stand up and state that they feel the isolation is necessary and that they
are prepared to do the work to implement the isolation.
If there is at least one person committing themselves, then we should
discuss the timetable
I think that a week is quite generous. I'd cut it down to 4 days. In
any case, I support the general scheme here.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
I would propose that we give until this time next week for somebody to
stand up and state
Yup, sounds reasonable.
On Feb 26, 2013, at 9:14 AM, Stephen Connolly stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com
wrote:
I would propose that we give until this time next week for somebody to
stand up and state that they feel the isolation is necessary and that they
are prepared to do the work to
I thought about that, but I suspect that we are at least 1 week away from
being ready to cut 3.1.0 anyway, so 1 week seems safest and gives potential
volunteers time to chime in. If Jason thinks he will be ready to cut 3.1.0
in 4 days time, then I would consider 4 days...
On 26 February 2013
OK, I follow the logic now.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought about that, but I suspect that we are at least 1 week away from
being ready to cut 3.1.0 anyway, so 1 week seems safest and gives potential
volunteers time to chime
With a bit of a notice (don't care if it's one week or 4 days or….), I
certainly support this path. We need to talking about it and get 3.1 out.
Dan
On Feb 26, 2013, at 9:05 AM, Jason van Zyl ja...@tesla.io wrote:
As I posted previously I would like to do the 3.1.0 release but I don't
Did you finally tried full graph analysis on Central to see what Maven plugins
actually depend on SLF4J or an implementation as intended on february 1st?
This was a great idea to have some facts to predict problems like SONAR-3979
But if such idea is harder than expected, doing a release and
16 matches
Mail list logo
