Hi, > Am 14.03.2016 um 21:52 schrieb Andreas Lehmkuehler <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > Am 14.03.2016 um 19:02 schrieb Tilman Hausherr: >> Am 14.03.2016 um 18:35 schrieb Andreas Lehmkuehler: >>> Hi, >>> >>> a candidate for the PDFBox 2.0.0 release is available at: >>> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pdfbox/2.0.0/ >>> >>> The release candidate is a zip archive of the sources in: >>> >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/pdfbox/tags/2.0.0/ >>> >>> The SHA1 checksum of the archive is >>> be199bb5c18d41275ad4b509dc488408dafa9f78. >>> >>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache PDFBox 2.0.0. >>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at >>> least three +1 PDFBox PMC votes are cast. >>> >>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache PDFBox 2.0.0 >>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >>> >>> Here is my +1 >> >> +1 and thanks for the last minute work! > Unfortunately my last minute work seems to fix one half of the issue only. :-( > > So, the question is, should we continue with the vote and fix the problem > afterwards, or stop right now and restart the vote? I'm not sure if it is > severe enough or not. WDYT?
As there seems to be a workaround for the user I'd think we can continue. BR Maruan > >> Tilman > > BR > Andreas > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
