The flurry should be done for a while ;) G
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>wrote: > You are checking stuff in too fast for me to fire up beta3 quite that > quick ;-) > > Ralph > > On Oct 9, 2012, at 5:53 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Release early, release often! > > I would fire up beta3 ASAP then, with little or no time in between, no > sense in waiting ;) > > Gary > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> To be honest, I'm tempted to let the release go out and then just do >> beta3 next week. Does anyone else think beta2 should have a respin for this? >> >> Ralph >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Since we are claiming beta status and we care for a good experience >> coming from 1.x I think this kind of fix should be in a "beta", otherwise, >> it feels like an "alpha". If I replace v1.2 with beta2 in an app, I should >> "see" normal output, otherwise, yes it's not pretty, but it sure is not >> inspiring confidence! ;) >> >> I'd be OK for a re-spin of a beta2 RC but I'm not going to -1 at this >> point it because I want to keep the ball rolling. >> >> Gary >> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Ralph Goers >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Not disagreeing but I won't be able to spin up a second candidate until >>> tonight at the earliest as I am traveling. FWIW, AbstractLogger in beta1 >>> is more broken that this is. This doesn't actually "not function", it just >>> isn't pretty. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> >>> On Oct 9, 2012, at 2:24 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> >>> I think we should consider this a show stopper for beta 2. Anyone else? >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> On Oct 9, 2012, at 2:26, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Something was calling one of the methods that converts the incoming >>> String to an ObjectMessage and then calling forcedLog, which then was >>> wrapping that with another ObjectMessage. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> >>> This is not right (in trunk, I am not sure about what happens in the >>> beta2 RC): >>> >>> I am seeing this log output in my app which uses Apache Commons VFS 2.0: >>> >>> 2012-10-08 22:31:47,281 [main] INFO : ObjectMessage[obj=Using >>> "C:\Users\ggregory\AppData\Local\Temp\vfs_cache" as temporary files store.] >>> >>> With plain 1.2, I saw: >>> >>> 2012-10-08 22:31:47,281 [main] INFO : Using >>> "C:\Users\ggregory\AppData\Local\Temp\vfs_cache" as temporary files store. >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> -- >>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 >>> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK >>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 >> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> >> > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
