Julien Vermillard a écrit :
For the content we need to remove all the 1.X references and I would
like to provide much more visibility to sub-projects (a bit like on
directory.apache.org).
We should also keep some pointer to 1.0 somewhere.
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.nex
Le Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:04:28 +0530,
Ashish a écrit :
> > http://mina.apache.org/mina2/
> >
> > If you can't wait a few hours that the mirrors get updated, you can
> > ook at it using a proxy :
> > 140.211.11.10:80
> >
> > There is no content yet, just a new design taken from ADS.
> >
> > If you d
> http://mina.apache.org/mina2/
>
> If you can't wait a few hours that the mirrors get updated, you can ook at
> it using a proxy :
> 140.211.11.10:80
>
> There is no content yet, just a new design taken from ADS.
>
> If you don't like the deep purple (shame on you ! The best 70's band !)
> header,
deep purple one is very cool :)
Cordialement, Regards,
-Edouard De Oliveira-
- Message d'origine
De : Emmanuel Lcharny
À : dev@mina.apache.org
Envoyé le : Lun 25 Janvier 2010, 18 h 27 min 14 s
Objet : Re: Are we ready for MINA 2.0.0-RC2 ?
Julien Vermillard a écrit :
> Le Mon
Alan D. Cabrera a écrit :
fussy point: should the copyright include 2010?
Changed. It will be 2010 now.
Regards,
Alan
On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Emmanuel Lcharny wrote:
Julien Vermillard a écrit :
Le Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:09:41 -0700,
Jeff Genender a écrit :
On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote:
Hi,
IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all
the PR stuff implyi
Julien Vermillard a écrit :
Le Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:09:41 -0700,
Jeff Genender a écrit :
On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote:
Hi,
IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all
the PR stuff implying the 2.0 release.
it would be a shame to release
Le Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:09:41 -0700,
Jeff Genender a écrit :
>
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all
> > the PR stuff implying the 2.0 release.
> > it would be a shame to release 2.0 without good
On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote:
> Hi,
> IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all the
> PR stuff implying the 2.0 release.
> it would be a shame to release 2.0 without good announcement and an
> updated/cleaned website.
>
So lets do that ;-)
Jeff
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Julien Vermillard
wrote:
> Hi,
> IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all the
> PR stuff implying the 2.0 release.
> it would be a shame to release 2.0 without good announcement and an
> updated/cleaned website.
Sorry ! didn't get much :
Hi,
IMO it's dot zero ready, the main effort is on the website and all the
PR stuff implying the 2.0 release.
it would be a shame to release 2.0 without good announcement and an
updated/cleaned website.
Julien
Le Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:47:12 -0700,
Jeff Genender a écrit :
> May I ask why this mus
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Ashish wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny
> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> the JIRA list has been cleared, we just have 5 remaining issues so far :
>>
>>
>> Bug DIRMINA-539 NioDatagramConnector doesn't takes the TrafficClass
>> value set
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> the JIRA list has been cleared, we just have 5 remaining issues so far :
>
>
> Bug DIRMINA-539 NioDatagramConnector doesn't takes the TrafficClass
> value set to his DatagramSessionConfig
> Impr DIRMINA-682 We need a
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gone on a long
> time and its ok to release a 2.0 version. Thats why we can release 2.0.1,
> etc. Also... folks have issues with 2.0 release because the dot oh have
> negative c
Makes sense to me. Let loose the Kraken!
Regards,
Alan
On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:55 PM, Norman Maurer wrote:
+1,
time for 2.0 !
Bye,
Norman
2010/1/22 Niklas Gustavsson :
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Jeff Genender
wrote:
May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gon
+1,
time for 2.0 !
Bye,
Norman
2010/1/22 Niklas Gustavsson :
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>> May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gone on a long
>> time and its ok to release a 2.0 version.
>
> +1, go for it!
>
> /niklas
>
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gone on a long
> time and its ok to release a 2.0 version.
+1, go for it!
/niklas
Jeff Genender a écrit :
May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gone on
a long time and its ok to release a 2.0 version. Thats why we can
release 2.0.1, etc. Also... folks have issues with 2.0 release
because the dot oh have negative connotations. IMHO, lets get a real
May I ask why this must be a RC2? I think the 2.0 series has gone on
a long time and its ok to release a 2.0 version. Thats why we can
release 2.0.1, etc. Also... folks have issues with 2.0 release
because the dot oh have negative connotations. IMHO, lets get a real
2.0 out and start wo
Sorry, there are some unscheduled issues too :
DIRMINA-738Using IoEventQueueThrottler with a WriteRequestFilter can
lead to hangs
DIRMINA-379setKeepAlive/setTcpNoDelay and exceptions in Windows Vista
DIRMINA-724getScheduledWriteMessages not zero after all sessions closed
I think we
Le Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:22:35 +0100,
Emmanuel Lecharny a écrit :
> Hi guys,
>
> the JIRA list has been cleared, we just have 5 remaining issues so
> far :
>
>
> Bug DIRMINA-539NioDatagramConnector doesn't takes the
> TrafficClass value set to his DatagramSessionConfig
> Impr DIRMINA-682
Hi guys,
the JIRA list has been cleared, we just have 5 remaining issues so far :
Bug DIRMINA-539NioDatagramConnector doesn't takes the TrafficClass
value set to his DatagramSessionConfig
Impr DIRMINA-682We need a better documentation for the
ExecutorFilter [was :Writing more than on
22 matches
Mail list logo
