[RESULT] [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

This vote has passed with the following votes: +1 (binding): John, Benjamin, Brett, Brian, Lukas +1 (non-binding): Nicolas I'll promote the artifacts and deploy the site changes. Thanks, -john John Casey wrote: Hi, I've resolved the issue with plexus-interpolation, reverified the ITs,

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:28 AM, Paul Benedict pbened...@apache.org wrote: Will the release notes contain any general justification for an upgrade? For example, can it highlight the major improvements between 2.1 and 2.2? or 2.0 and 2.2? +1 Totally agree. It starts to be very difficult for

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

+1 -Lukas John Casey wrote: Hi, I've resolved the issue with plexus-interpolation, reverified the ITs, and restaged the release. The URLs below have been updated. Let's see if we can get through this vote without further interruption, I guess. See also the documentation improvements

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

+1Nicolas 2009/6/29 Lukas Theussl ltheu...@apache.org +1 -Lukas John Casey wrote: Hi, I've resolved the issue with plexus-interpolation, reverified the ITs, and restaged the release. The URLs below have been updated. Let's see if we can get through this vote without further

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

I've backed out all version-expression transformation, including the code that was added in 2.1.0-*. The reason for this is that version-expression transformation causes critical problems with GPG, etc. that are blockers for doing releases and such. After exploring this issue thoroughly to

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

John Casey wrote: I've backed out all version-expression transformation, including the code that was added in 2.1.0-*. Yup, got that. So, 4167 isn't fixed to my knowledge. I basically don't follow your comment on MNG-3538: This issue duplicates the reports in MNG-3057 and MNG-4167 To

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

That's a fair point. So, would you say it'd be better to reopen 3057 and assign it to 3.x, or open a new issue that references 3057 and 4167, and assign that to 3.x? I lost track of the original reason 4167 was opened, which has indeed been resolved. Apologies for not paying attention to the

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

John Casey wrote: So, would you say it'd be better to reopen 3057 and assign it to 3.x, or open a new issue that references 3057 and 4167, and assign that to 3.x? That's actually the question that I couldn't answer for myself and the only other opinion so far was an Agreed by Brett on an or

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

Okay, that's done. MNG-4223 is the new issue if you're interested. Benjamin Bentmann wrote: John Casey wrote: So, would you say it'd be better to reopen 3057 and assign it to 3.x, or open a new issue that references 3057 and 4167, and assign that to 3.x? That's actually the question that I

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

On 30/06/2009, at 5:02 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote: John Casey wrote: So, would you say it'd be better to reopen 3057 and assign it to 3.x, or open a new issue that references 3057 and 4167, and assign that to 3.x? That's actually the question that I couldn't answer for myself and the

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

+1, the issues I had with pre-emptive auth in the last one are fixed. On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Benjamin Bentmannbenjamin.bentm...@udo.edu wrote: John Casey wrote: We've solved 28 issues for this release:

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

John Casey wrote: We've solved 28 issues for this release: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500styleName=Htmlversion=15103 The release history seems a little confusing. For instance, MNG-3538 was listed but actually duplicates an unresolved issue. I think dups

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

Will the release notes contain any general justification for an upgrade? For example, can it highlight the major improvements between 2.1 and 2.2? or 2.0 and 2.2? On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Benjamin Bentmannbenjamin.bentm...@udo.edu wrote: John Casey wrote: We've solved 28 issues for

Re: [VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

On 29/06/2009, at 3:01 AM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote: John Casey wrote: We've solved 28 issues for this release: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500styleName=Htmlversion=15103 The release history seems a little confusing. For instance, MNG-3538 was listed but

[VOTE] Maven 2.2.0 (Fourth Attempt)

Hi, I've resolved the issue with plexus-interpolation, reverified the ITs, and restaged the release. The URLs below have been updated. Let's see if we can get through this vote without further interruption, I guess. See also the documentation improvements listing below for more information