apache-ant-dotnet-0.1-SNAPSHOT-bin.zip - /LICENSE:190: * Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] No year, no copyright owner? (same inside the jar) - version=0.1 ? that value is defined in common/build.xml but should be overwritten in a build.properties - JAR!/manifest.mf: should we include version information (about the antlib) in the manifest file?
Cant do a functional test, because of no-.NET.knowledge :-) But besides that +1 from me. Jan >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >Von: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Gesendet: Freitag, 8. September 2006 14:20 >An: Ant Developers List >Betreff: Re: [VOTE] New Release Candidate for .NET Antlib 1.0 Beta 1 > >Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> I've put up new builds of source and binary distributions >for the .NEt >> Antlib. This time I even went the extra mile of typing my >passphrase >> six times, which means the files are PGP signed 8-) >> >> <http://people.apache.org/~bodewig/dotnet-rc/distribution/> >> >> I think I've addressed all (well, most) of Jan's comments >made on the >> "What should an Antlib distribution contain" thread, which means the >> source distribution now actually builds ;-) >> >> As with last time, I haven't updated the version number yet, >but I do >> have (uncommitted) tags that correspond to the exact code. >> >> Please give those archives a try and if you feel comfortable with >> distributing the contents (with adapted version numbers) as Ant 1.0 >> Beta 1 then cast your +1 >> > >+1 > >except to calling it Ant 1.0 Beta 1 :-) > >Conor > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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]
