As a matter of fact, right now, it’s setup to pull down tags/2.2.2. There’s a build scheduled, but it has to wait until the other River builds are done, so probably will run sometime tomorrow.
Cheers, Greg. On Nov 10, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Jonathan Costers <jonathan.cost...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Greg > That was exactly where I was going. > I hadn't checked in Hudson, which I should have done. > Thanks > Jonathan > > Op 10-nov.-2013, om 23:38 heeft Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> het > volgende geschreven: > >> >> We already have this, which has been there since the last release. >> >> https://builds.apache.org/job/river-2.2-qa-jdk7/ >> >> It pulls from the 2.2 branch, which the 2.2.2 tag will be copied from. >> Currently the build passes. >> >> My understanding has always been that release artifacts need to be generated >> and signed on a machine that is under local control of the code signer (i.e. >> release manager, i.e. me for the 2.2.2 release). As such, I don’t think we >> should use the artifacts generated under Hudson, although the jars are >> certainly there if anyone wants to grab a snapshot. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Greg Trasuk. >> >> https://builds.apache.org/job/river-2.2-qa-jdk7/ >> >> >> On Nov 10, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Jonathan Costers <jonathan.cost...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Should we setup a Hudson build that pulls the 2.2.2 tag from SVN, tests it, >>> generates reports and creates release artifacts? >>> >>> Op 5-okt.-2013, om 05:30 heeft Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> het volgende >>> geschreven: >>> >>>> Sim also did some work based on Gregg's contribution, it's included in >>>> trunk, it was during this time that unrelated synchronization issues >>>> caused progress on this work to stall. The design is quite elegant and >>>> flexible. >>>> >>>> Due to synchronization bugs causing test failures, I branched from an >>>> earlier trunk version that appeared stable. I don't have access to >>>> hardware suitable for generating the failure conditions, so have been >>>> unable to continue working on these test failures. >>>> >>>> Despite being quite impressed by its elegance, there are some fundamental >>>> design flaws with Reggie's implementation regarding mutation, these only >>>> come to light are spending hours working through the code. >>>> >>>> I have considered rewriting Reggie, after an unsuccessful refactoring >>>> attempt. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Peter. >>>> >>>> ----- Original message ----- >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-336?page=com.atlassian.jira >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 3, 2013, at 1039AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm having trouble finding a reference to that. Do you happen to have >>>>>> a link to email archives or a Jira issue? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Greg. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2013-10-02, at 8:15 PM, Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey Greg, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The work that Gregg Wonderly championed with the RMIClassLoaderSpi >>>>>>> would be one for me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dennis >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 2, 2013, at 546PM, Greg Trasuk wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm planning to propose a release for River 2.2.2 later this week, >>>>>>>> based on the current state of the 2.2. branch. The only change >>>>>>>> from 2.2.1 is the addition of the JMX Entry classes, plus addition >>>>>>>> of one more jar file to be added to Maven Central (jsk-policy.jar >>>>>>>> if I remember correctly). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any objections or anything else that anyone wants to include in >>>>>>>> the release? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Greg Trasuk. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
