On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 6:02 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> On 9/3/20 2:44 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
> >> argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned
On 9/3/20 2:44 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
have not been able to get the deadlock to happen, so I would like to
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 2:25 PM Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 7, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >
> > On 07/09/2020 18:18, sebb wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Such automation already exists, and is used to generate the VOTE
> >> emails used by many Commons RMs
> >>
> >> $ mvn
> On Sep 7, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 07/09/2020 18:18, sebb wrote:
>
>
>
>> Such automation already exists, and is used to generate the VOTE
>> emails used by many Commons RMs
>>
>> $ mvn commons-release:vote-txt
>
> Thanks for that.
>
> I tried it out on the
On 07/09/2020 18:18, sebb wrote:
> Such automation already exists, and is used to generate the VOTE
> emails used by many Commons RMs
>
> $ mvn commons-release:vote-txt
Thanks for that.
I tried it out on the 1.2.3-RC1 release directory and it looks like it
depends on various naming
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 16:12, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 07/09/2020 15:26, sebb wrote:
> > Suppose we take the following example:
> >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c99519e1c8e0a4af5be02f40e8e44b408cbc3d4568a334f3a400b94f%40%3Cdev.commons.apache.org%3E
> >
> > This is Commons Daemon 1.2.0
As long as your private key is safe, whatever the signed parts are will be
tamper proof. Git lets you sign commits; does SVN offer anything similar?
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 10:12 Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 07/09/2020 15:26, sebb wrote:
>
> > Suppose we take the following example:
>
> >
>
> >
>
On 07/09/2020 15:26, sebb wrote:
> Suppose we take the following example:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c99519e1c8e0a4af5be02f40e8e44b408cbc3d4568a334f3a400b94f%40%3Cdev.commons.apache.org%3E
>
> This is Commons Daemon 1.2.0 based on RC2.
>
> Take for example:
>
>
On 07/09/2020 15:40, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> Also, I would think we should be as accommodating as possible to Mark as he
> is indeed the top maintainer on [daemon]. I doubt we’d be making progress
> there with out him.
>
> I’ve found his [VOTE] threads to be entirely sufficient for validation
>
Also, I would think we should be as accommodating as possible to Mark as he is
indeed the top maintainer on [daemon]. I doubt we’d be making progress there
with out him.
I’ve found his [VOTE] threads to be entirely sufficient for validation despite
their differences in content. I’m. +1 for
Suppose we take the following example:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c99519e1c8e0a4af5be02f40e8e44b408cbc3d4568a334f3a400b94f%40%3Cdev.commons.apache.org%3E
This is Commons Daemon 1.2.0 based on RC2.
Take for example:
Hello.
> > [...]
> > see an explanation for why it is necessary
> > (or even helpful) to include artefact hashes in the vote mail.
> >
> I agree and understand all your points here.
Well, I don't.
An explanation would be useful indeed.
> > Validating the svn revision for the dist repo [ ... vs
> On Sep 7, 2020, at 6:15 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 04/09/2020 12:30, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>> +1 binding.
>
> Thanks for testing and voting.
>
>> Builds on java 7 and java 11 works with ‘mvn clean test’
>>
>> Build on java 8 works with ‘mvn clean test install site’
>>
>> % mvn
On 04/09/2020 12:30, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> +1 binding.
Thanks for testing and voting.
> Builds on java 7 and java 11 works with ‘mvn clean test’
>
> Build on java 8 works with ‘mvn clean test install site’
>
> % mvn -version
> Apache Maven 3.6.3 (cecedd343002696d0abb50b32b541b8a6ba2883f)
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
