On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 08:06:36 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote:
IMO, let's stick with 1.0-alpha1. There is no need to rush the new
API and
this will make the code available to all through Maven repos.
Hopefully
once the code is more easy to use from builds, we will get more
feedback.
What if there
IMO, let's stick with 1.0-alpha1. There is no need to rush the new API and
this will make the code available to all through Maven repos. Hopefully
once the code is more easy to use from builds, we will get more feedback.
Gary
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 12:17 AM Bruno P. Kinoshita
wrote:
> >The
I can’t see why not to do this.
+1 to the idea
> On Nov 4, 2018, at 7:08 AM, Otto Fowler wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
> On November 3, 2018 at 10:55:08, Gary Gregory (garydgreg...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> I propose we update the Java requirement for [vfs] from Java 7 to Java 8.
>
> Gary
+1
On November 3, 2018 at 10:55:08, Gary Gregory (garydgreg...@gmail.com)
wrote:
I propose we update the Java requirement for [vfs] from Java 7 to Java 8.
Gary
>The release notes says that version 1.0 was released 24 November 2013.
>Should be updated?
Oh, mea culpa. That slipped me.
Not sure whether we also need 1.0-alpha1 or simply 1.0 is OK (if the former,
then I think we would have to double-check the rest of the docs for other
entries like that).
I am canceling this VOTE due to problems building the release candidate.
I am going overseas in one month, and also have some releases at $work and one
language exam in the coming days.
So I won't be able to roll another release in 2018. Hopefully will be able to
catch up somewhere in 2019.
That's funny, I ran the release process, and had been running `mvn clean test`
with each pull request... but now `mvn clean test` is failing on the current
working dir (pointing to the tag in git).
Will cancel the vote.
Thanks
Bruno
From: Gary Gregory
To:
