Justin, Robbie,
I tested Java Broker, Java Client and Management Console artefacts.
Everything worked fine for me. No issue is found.
Details of the tests:
Started Java Broker.
Created test queue using Management Console and bound that queue to
the direct exchange.
Published test messages into
Hi, Robbie. Yes, you're right. I've corrected the RC4 artifacts at the
existing RC4 link.
As to Darryl's request, in my opinion we should defer it.
Justin
On Thu, 10 May 2012, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi Justin,
I think it would be good to prepare the final artifacts (some seem
like they
2009/12/9 Rafael Schloming rafa...@redhat.com:
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I think you have misunderstood what I meant by that entirely, as by the
build system in general to always generate the release style artifacts I
meant exactly what you are suggesting, that the build system should be
Martin Ritchie wrote:
2009/12/9 Rafael Schloming rafa...@redhat.com:
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I think you have misunderstood what I meant by that entirely, as by the
build system in general to always generate the release style artifacts I
meant exactly what you are suggesting, that the build
: Release artifacts
Martin Ritchie wrote:
2009/12/9 Rafael Schloming rafa...@redhat.com:
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I think you have misunderstood what I meant by that entirely, as by
the
build system in general to always generate the release style
artifacts I
meant exactly what you are suggesting
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi all,
Now that we have entered another release phase I think it would be a good time to discuss the release artifacts. I would like to see 0.6 ship with some updates to the artifacts we produce to make things more useful and obvious for our users.
I think it's a bit
a mashup that
contains things people don't want or that can't even be used together.
Robbie
-Original Message-
From: Rafael Schloming [mailto:rafa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 09 December 2009 17:17
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release artifacts
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi all,
Now
2009/12/9 Rafael Schloming rafa...@redhat.com
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi all,
Now that we have entered another release phase I think it would be a good
time to discuss the release artifacts. I would like to see 0.6 ship with
some updates to the artifacts we produce to make things more useful
currently
are.
Robbie
-Original Message-
From: Rafael Schloming [mailto:rafa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 09 December 2009 17:45
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release artifacts
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I'm not meaning to suggest doing any complex transformations, rather
using what
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Robert Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/12/9 Rafael Schloming rafa...@redhat.com
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi all,
Now that we have entered another release phase I think it would be a good
time to discuss the release artifacts. I would like to see
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I can see what you are saying and thus agree that it would be beneficial for
the build system in general to always generate the release style artifacts.
However I don't see that this means we shouldn't use what we have at our
disposal now in order to give our users a
of and end up with
what we release...ie release style. The reason there is anything else in place
right now is that they arent, IMO.
Robbie
-Original Message-
From: Rafael Schloming [mailto:rafa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 09 December 2009 19:38
To: dev@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I think you have misunderstood what I meant by that entirely, as by the build
system in general to always generate the release style artifacts I meant exactly
what you are suggesting, that the build system should be modified to generate something
we can simply take a
13 matches
Mail list logo
