Gary, I performed the merge back into the trunk so that the security patches that were tested in the branch have a development presence.
The security patches were the primary difference between the branch and the trunk. Documentation updates (esp download) are also merged back into the trunk. Lots of JIRA work still remains as JIRA issues and not committed to the trunk. - Steve > Yes, in principle, the branches changes should be merged back to trunk . > The problem I see is that the state of trunk is not known (yet). For > example, building it has different Java version requirements and I cannot > tell if this is intentional or not. > > Gary > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:48 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> FYI: >> >> The [Xalan-J] 2.7.2 seems to be implemented in "branches" and the >> changes not yet merged or committed back into the "trunk". >> >> I just finished reviewing the differences and believe that a >> merge back into the "trunk" is appropriate. >> >> I am starting my review of the website documentation. >> >> My sincere thanks goes to all those committers and members >> for their work on the Java security issue. >> >> Sincerely, >> Steven J. Hathaway >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second > Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
