It seems to be failing because webdav is not in commons-vfs anymore. Webdav seems to be moved to the sandbox since october
See the log from their svn repository : r466359 | imario | 2006-10-21 09:40:29 +0200 (Sat, 21 Oct 2006) | 2 lines moved smb and webdav to sandbox So I guess we should either ask them to put their sandbox in gump, or use a static package. NB: - In http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/gump/metadata/project/ivy.xml, the package is wrong. - What I didn't understand on the page http://vmgump.apache.org/gump/public/ivy/ivy/index.html is the first success the 25 september ? Gilles > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 2:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: package rename > > Xavier Hanin wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I finally found time to do the refactoring of package names. Please > > use the current trunk version as basis for further patch submission. > > > > Then antlib.xml is put both at org.apache.ivy.ant and > > fr.jayasoft.ivy.antduring packaging (in the jar target of the > > build.xml), for backward compatibility of build scripts using Ivy. > aah, I see. one source file, two places in the jar. devious. > I like it. > > > > > I've also tried to use apache as organisation instead of > jayasoft as > > often as possible. What still need to be done is test > tutorials, and > > rewrite the documentation accordingly if we want to see apache as > > organisation instead of jayasoft in the shell and files > captures. If > > anybody has some time to take even only one tutorial, it > would be very > > helpful. But before we need to produce an ivy snapshot > version to use > > for those tutorials, so that the branding used within Ivy (like the > > web site) is correct. Self building Ivy with this snapshot version > > would also be a good thing, to remove the > fr.jayasoft.ivy.ant antlib > > in Ivy build file. > > > > So one question: Is it allowed to put a snapshot version of > Ivy (i.e. > > not a > > release) on the Ivy web site here at the incubator (in > > http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/download/latest/ivy.jar for > instance, > > to follow conventions previously used at jayasoft)? > > > > Unless anyone vetoes it, I dont see why not. We just need to > warn people that this is still 'in incubation', unstable, for > developers only, etc. > etc. > > On a related note, what is the gump status? I see that gump > mails go to maarten, instead of the group. That should be > changed to go to ivy-dev or ivy-commits. > > I have some gump projects that run off a snapshot of gump > 1.4.1 in my own SCM repository. Is it time to move to > SVN_HEAD gump? How stable has gump been with Ivy builds so far? > > -steve >
