Looks good to me.  +1 assuming build has been tested on 1.2, which is
what the jar manifest specifies.

One small nit, which you could do without another RC, IMO, or ignore:

The checkstyle report is not clean.  One real javadoc error is
flagged, some missing javadoc, missing package javadoc for a couple of
packages, and some bogus complaints. I would recommend either fixing
all of the errors, modifying checkstyle.xml, or dropping the report
from the doc included in the distribution.

Phil

On 8/31/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ran the usual gamut of checks, looks good to me.

<snip/>
> ---------------
> [X] +1  I support this release
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -0
> [ ] -1  I oppose this release because...
> ----------------
>
<snap/>

-Rahul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to