downloaded sources, compiled, tests passed, tested on several files,
works ok. OS: Debian Testing, JVM Sun 1.7.0.05
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> A candidate for the Tika 1.2 release is available at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/apach
looks ok for me, +1
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Alex Ott wrote:
> downloaded sources, compiled, tests passed, tested on several files,
> works ok. OS: Debian Testing, JVM Sun 1.7.0.05
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> A candidate for
+1
I smoke tested, extracting text for the Lucene in Action PDF (looked
good), and verified TIKA-948 is fixed.
Why are there original-tika-app* files in the RC directory?
Also, we used to name it apache-tika-1.1.src.* but now we dropped the
apache- prefix? Is that intentional? (tika-app jar ha
All tests succeeded on :
Linux Fedora 17
OSX 10.7.4
+1
Regards,
Zabrane
On Jul 11, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
> +1
>
> I smoke tested, extracting text for the Lucene in Action PDF (looked
> good), and verified TIKA-948 is fixed.
>
> Why are there original-tika-app* files in t
All tests succeeded on :
Linux Fedora 17
OSX 10.7.4
+1
Regards,
Zabrane
On Jul 11, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
> +1
>
> I smoke tested, extracting text for the Lucene in Action PDF (looked
> good), and verified TIKA-948 is fixed.
>
> Why are there original-tika-app* files in t
Thanks Mike!
On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
> +1
>
> I smoke tested, extracting text for the Lucene in Action PDF (looked
> good), and verified TIKA-948 is fixed.
>
> Why are there original-tika-app* files in the RC directory?
Good question: this is the first time I've
+1
---
Jörg Ehrlich | Computer Scientist | XMP Technology | Adobe Systems |
joerg.ehrl...@adobe.com | work: +49(40)306360
-Original Message-
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 22:30
To: dev@tika.apache.org
Cc: u...@tika.a
Hi Chris,
On 10 July 2012 21:29, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
>
> The SHA1 checksum of the archive is 8146c1161d35e6b1dc670d078a773f96c37eef8c.
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Tika 1.2.
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at
> least
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Tika 1.2.
[x] +1 Release this package as Apache Tika 1.2
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
>> Why are there original-tika-app* files in the RC directory?
>
> Good question: this is the first time I've seen them in there too.
I think they're coming from the shad
Hi,
here is my +1.
Kind regards,
Oleg
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
> > On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
> >> Why are there original-tika-app* files in the RC directory?
On Jul 10, 2012, at 1:29pm, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> A candidate for the Tika 1.2 release is available at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/apache-tika-1.2/rc1/
>
> The release candidate is a zip archive of the sources in:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tika
Hey Jukka,
On Jul 11, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
>>> Why are there original-tika-app* files in the RC directory?
>>
>> Good question: this is the f
13 matches
Mail list logo
