"a4f2ce0094e203f4b221f36b4f49bc3f356250db56ae9bcde1881ad28787cae8e90e6dd61c9150d46abf39b396a6b1fbd9da0ee062b8cebaa622c7b0d28e56c7 *commons-daemon-1.5.1.jar”
versus “a4f2ce0094e203f4b221f36b4f49bc3f356250db56ae9bcde1881ad28787cae8e90e6dd61c9150d46abf39b396a6b1fbd9da0ee062b8cebaa622c7b0d28e56c7” It doesn’t particularly matter to me in that the data is sufficiently there, just unfamiliar with the first format. I merely found it curious. Cheers, -Rob > On Dec 15, 2025, at 4:23 AM, Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 14/12/2025 23:07, Rob Tompkins wrote: >> +1, why have filename suffixes in the signature files? > > Could you clarify what you mean by this please? An example of what you > currently see vs what you expected to see would probably help. > > Mark > > > java build works, binary build works. site and release notes all in order. >>> On Dec 12, 2025, at 3:27 AM, Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/12/2025 15:13, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> >>> <snip/> >>> >>>> [X] +1 Release these artifacts >>>> [ ] +0 OK, but... >>>> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix... >>>> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because... >>> >>> Tested the Windows binaries with Tomcat 11.0.15 and the dependency issue on >>> the visual C runtime has been resolved. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>
