You're email was a response to build.xml, not those, so I'm guessing
that not enough people have seen this fix; namely, Adrian is the one who
rewrote that logic(to make it more finalizable), so introduced this problem.
On 06/29/2013 02:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
I was not speaking of this
I was not speaking of this new feature, but
r1497889
r1497890
Which are respectively about
extend-entity
java.sql.Timestamp extends java.util.Date
By and large, it seems we sometimes miss to backport fixes to living releases.
It seems to me that we should always try to see if it's possible
Should we not backport those fixes?
Jacques
From: doo...@apache.org
Author: doogie
Date: Fri Jun 28 19:30:09 2013
New Revision: 1497897
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1497897
Log:
FIX: Oops, hot-deploy/docs building was broken, because I missed 2 lines
when I up-copied the
Huh? This is a fix for a change that I just added *today*. What is
there to backport?
On 06/28/2013 03:33 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Should we not backport those fixes?
Jacques
From:doo...@apache.org
Author: doogie
Date: Fri Jun 28 19:30:09 2013
New Revision: 1497897
URL:
Sorry, I meant *those* fixes including rather
r1497889
r1497890
Jacques
From: Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com
Huh? This is a fix for a change that I just added *today*. What is
there to backport?
On 06/28/2013 03:33 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Should we not backport those fixes?
I don't see the need. If there are folders in hot-deploy that aren't
supposed to be built, so one created a hot-deploy/build.xml to keep them
from building, but because docs didn't use that, would cause an issue.
Just don't build the docs then, it's not really something that should be
