Is this minor dependency upgrade in a Camel micro release also because of
an issue with Leveldb in Camel 2.12.1? Do we have an issue for this?

Best,

Christian
-----------------

Software Integration Specialist

Apache Member
V.P. Apache Camel | Apache Camel PMC Member | Apache Camel committer
Apache Incubator PMC Member

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christian-mueller/11/551/642


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:10 AM, <davscl...@apache.org> wrote:

> Updated Branches:
>   refs/heads/camel-2.12.x 2b3704f97 -> b220ce070
>
>
> Upgrade to leveldbjni 1.8
>
>
> Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/repo
> Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/commit/b220ce07
> Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/tree/b220ce07
> Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/diff/b220ce07
>
> Branch: refs/heads/camel-2.12.x
> Commit: b220ce0702ed55496d394e6e337a36beb45f7a9d
> Parents: 2b3704f
> Author: Claus Ibsen <davscl...@apache.org>
> Authored: Fri Oct 18 09:47:41 2013 +0200
> Committer: Claus Ibsen <davscl...@apache.org>
> Committed: Fri Oct 18 11:10:51 2013 +0200
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  parent/pom.xml | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/blob/b220ce07/parent/pom.xml
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> diff --git a/parent/pom.xml b/parent/pom.xml
> index f1bc66c..b7b0fae 100644
> --- a/parent/pom.xml
> +++ b/parent/pom.xml
> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@
>      <karaf-version>2.3.3</karaf-version>
>      <krati-version>0.4.9</krati-version>
>      <kxml2-bundle-version>2.3.0_2</kxml2-bundle-version>
> -    <leveldbjni-version>1.7</leveldbjni-version>
> +    <leveldbjni-version>1.8</leveldbjni-version>
>      <log4j-version>1.2.17</log4j-version>
>      <!-- we await upgrade for lucene 4.x to sync -->
>      <lucene-bundle-version>3.6.0_1</lucene-bundle-version>
>
>

Reply via email to