We did something similar at Log4j to publish releases (I did not do
that set up but I do help on the project) so that a release manager
can use GitHub to publish releases instead of doing it on hardware
they control.
Gary
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 8:10 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> Unless I hear othe
Congratulations Jarkek :-)
I was glad to see a reference to
https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-reproducible-builds.html
I hope we can keep that Maven page up-to-date with whatever comes up so we
only have to look in one place ; -)
Gary
On Sun, Jan 14, 2024, 2:06 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
Over at Apache Commons, I added Java 21 builds to most of our GitHub
Actions builds without issues. I've also added Java 22-ea builds in a
few select components.
(The Apache Commons "project" is made up of many "components", each
producing one or more jars.)
We did run into the difference in preci
Hi David,
It would be quite helpful if you could let us know when GitHub is updated
to accept a 22-ea version. Apache Commons relies on GitHub for CI.
TY,
Gary
On Fri, Jul 28, 2023, 5:24 AM David Delabassee
wrote:
> Welcome to the OpenJDK Quality Outreach summer update.
>
> JDK 21 is now in R
I agree with Christopher FWIW, I don't see the technical reason to not do
this. I'd use this feature in Apache Commons Parent and other POMs when
needed for example.
Gary
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023, 18:42 Christopher wrote:
> It doesn't matter that some projects are stuck on old versions, or
> their r
You can ask on the ML, I said "my POV".
Gary
On Fri, Dec 9, 2022, 07:29 Gavin McDonald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 12:59 PM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>
> > I never want to use Gradle, so certainly a no for Conmons from my POV.
> >
>
>
I never want to use Gradle, so certainly a no for Conmons from my POV.
Gary
On Fri, Dec 9, 2022, 06:41 Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi
> Are we seriously activating this gradle enterprise to every build and
> so breaks a few builds without any notice?
>
>
> https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ma
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022, 00:32 Olivier Lamy wrote:
> moving the discussion to builds@
>
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 21:22, Nick Burch wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, David Blevins wrote:
> > > On a modern machine the build takes 1.5 to 2 hours, so we're looking
> for
> > > some options that could
Over at Apache Commons, we've switched to GitHub Actions. We did use Travis
for a while but it makes more sense to me to use GitHub since it is fast,
reliable, and where we mirror our repositories.
Gary
On Thu, Sep 1, 2022, 05:52 P. Ottlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> over the years Travis seems to have
Do you have an example of such a GH Action?
Gary
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022, 07:25 Gavin McDonald wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A recent feature pointed out by Jarek :
>
>
> https://github.blog/changelog/2022-01-14-github-actions-prevent-github-actions-from-approving-pull-requests/
>
> is to be able to disable
On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 8:22 PM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Le ven. 31 déc. 2021 à 14:17, Gary Gregory a
> écrit :
> >
> > WRT Commons, CI is handled by GitHub actions
>
> Whatever "handled" means here, is the sentence true for
> *all* components?
>
>
WRT Commons, CI is handled by GitHub actions these days so I am not worried
about losing ci.a.o.
TY
Gary
On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 6:38 AM Gavin McDonald wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> (This email is BCC many (19) lists, please reply to builds@apache.org
> only)
>
> Infra has set a FINAL date of January 31
ca00908dd48b645c1a7339@%3Ccommits.commons.apache.org%3E
> >
>
>
> This write access to commons-io appears to be in violation of the
> aforementioned policy.
>
> Dependabot's email alerts are currently the only acceptable method for
> working with the tool.
>
>
>
t time I tried I was informed that due to
> the program requiring write permissions to the repository, it wasn’t
> possible…
> This policy must have changed…
> Thanks for any info.
> lewismc
>
> On 2021/08/29 14:42:00 Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Most of Apache Common's com
Most of Apache Common's components' are happy users of Dependabot, which is
used on our GitHub mirrored repositories.
Gary
On Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 10:38 lewis john mcgibbney wrote:
> Hi builds@,
> I was advised to ask my question here instead of general@incubator.
> Thanks for any feedback
>
> >
Over at Apache Commons, I mostly pay attention to GitHub Actions builds on
Java LTS version plus the latest, plus the current EA, which currently
would be 8, 11, 16, and 17-EA.
Gary
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 08:45 Gavin McDonald wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 2:04 PM Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> >
FYI: Over at Commons, we are slowly switching components to SpotBugs.
Gary
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019, 17:14 Matt Sicker wrote:
> It's still in the puppet file as far as I can tell:
>
> https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/modules/build_slaves/manifests/jenkins.pp
>
> On Mon
FWIW, at my company, we develop on Java 8 and support Java 8 and 11 at
runtime.
Gary
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019, 23:05 Chris Lambertus wrote:
> All,
>
> We have received a number of tickets related to jdk9 and the libjli
> problem. I’m not sure exactly what the issue is, and we don’t have a
> solution
Hi All:
Any ideas on how to solve "Return code is: 401, ReasonPhrase: Unauthorized.
"?
Thank you,
Gary
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Apache Jenkins Server
> Date: Sun, Jul 8, 2018, 12:34
> Subject: Build failed in Jenkins: commons-dbcp #262
> To:
>
>
> See <
>
https://buil
FYI: We seen the same errors for Log4j 2.
Gary
On Oct 12, 2017 07:26, "Marshall Schor" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are getting failing builds where the build itself succeeds, but a
> subsequent
> failure happens at the post-build step of transferring artifacts to
> apache.snapshots. Many of the artifa
Can continuum be restarted? Perhaps the local maven cache needs to be
cleared?
Thank you,
Gary
-- Forwarded message --
From: Continuum@vmbuild
Date: Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:20 PM
Subject: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons - Commons VFS -
To: d...@commons.apache.org
21 matches
Mail list logo
