My build from the source zip on Linux failed with a reference to win32:

[ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project ruta-ep-parent: Could not resolve
dependencies for project org.apache.uima:ruta-ep-parent:pom:2.6.1: Could
not transfer artifact org.eclipse.swt.win32.win32:x86_64:jar:3.104.1
from/to averbis-osgi-releases (http://maven.averbis.com/m2/): GET request
of: org/eclipse/swt/win32/win32/x86_64/3.104.1/x86_64-3.104.1.jar from
averbis-osgi-releases failed: Connection reset

~Burn

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Peter Klügl <[email protected]>
wrote:

> a gentle ping :-)
>
> The vote is now open for almost two weeks and only one vote is missing.
>
>
> Peter
>
>
> Am 19.04.2017 um 17:32 schrieb Peter Klügl:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the first release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.6.1 is ready for
> voting.
> > This bugfix release is not compatible with UIMA 3.0.0.
> >
> > Major changes in this release:
> >
> > UIMA Ruta Language and Analysis Engine:
> > * Fixed problem with empty annotation list expressions
> > * Fixed false positive match in conjunct rules
> > * Requires UIMA 2.10.0 and uimaFIT 2.3.0
> >
> > UIMA Ruta Workbench:
> > * Fixed Query View
> >
> >
> > Staging repository:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1138/
> >
> > SVN tag:
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.6.1
> >
> > Update site:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.6.1-rc1/
> eclipse-update-site/ruta/
> >
> > Archive with all sources:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.6.1-rc1/
> ruta-2.6.1-source-release.zip
> >
> > Overall 7 issues have been fixed for this release
> > They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
> >
> > ... and here:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%
> 3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.6.1ruta%20AND%
> 20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
> >
> > Please vote on release:
> >
> > [ ] +1 OK to release
> > [ ]  0 Don't care
> > [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to