Hi,
Am Freitag, den 04.02.2011, 07:37 + schrieb Marcel Offermans:
Hello Felix,
Thanks. Two small issues:
It looks like you've copied the trademark notice footer from Sling (it still
reads Sling instead of Felix).
Yes, I did. Ooops ;-)
Fixed and re-exported.
There seems to be
Works for me. Thank you!
+1 (non-binding)
kind regards,
andreas
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 03:37:15PM +0100, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Vote on fileinstall .3.1.10
This release fixes three issues
Guillaume Nodet wrote
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 02:52, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
If enough people respond maybe we can reach some sort of consensus...or else
we could call a vote on it.
Can other felix members speak here ?
I guess we don't find consensus by just discussing
Fair enough. I'll start a vote now.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 09:39, Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org wrote:
Guillaume Nodet wrote
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 02:52, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
If enough people respond maybe we can reach some sort of consensus...or else
we
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases following a failed release must use a different version
The vote will be opened for at least 72 hours.
Happy voting!
+1 for A.
Regards
JB
On 02/04/2011 09:50 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases following a failed release must use a
Hi,
B - never reuse version numbers
Regards
Felix
Am Freitag, den 04.02.2011, 08:50 + schrieb Guillaume Nodet:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B -
B - Releases following a failed release must use a different version. For me
traceability is key. Much more transparent to the user.
Toni
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.comwrote:
Hi,
B - never reuse version numbers
Regards
Felix
Am Freitag, den
I'm voting for B: use different version numbers for each attempt
On 4 Feb 2011, at 9:50 , Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases
A
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 09:50, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases following a failed release must use a
B (non-binding)
Alasdair Nottingham
On 4 Feb 2011, at 09:42, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
A
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 09:50, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2578?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2578.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Refactored Configuration Admin Support in Rev. 1067145:
The
A (non-binding)
kind regards,
andreas
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 09:50:35AM +0100, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2682?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2682.
--
Resolution: Won't Fix
It looks like the Configuration Admin service extensions have
On 4 February 2011 08:50, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases following a failed release must use a different
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2771.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: configadmin-1.2.10
Assignee: Felix
[X] B - Releases following a failed release must use a different version
Carsten
Guillaume Nodet wrote
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases
Components that have a ConfigurationPolicy value of REQUIRE fail to activate
Key: FELIX-2824
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824
Project: Felix
So far, we are tied. :-)
- richard
On 2/4/11 3:50, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A - Releases following a failed release can reuse the same version
[ ] B - Releases following a failed release must use a
On 4 February 2011 16:09, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
So far, we are tied. :-)
I guess that means you get the casting vote ;)
- richard
On 2/4/11 3:50, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Following the discussion, I'm starting a vote to decide on a policy
for failed releases.
[ ] A
Just to be clear does failed release mean:
i) a release whose artifacts were published e.g. to apache.org/dist or
maven central then found to be bad
ii) a release that failed before the artifacts were published
I had been working to ii) but I can see there could be confusion.
Jeremy
On 4
On 2/4/11 11:29, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Just to be clear does failed release mean:
i) a release whose artifacts were published e.g. to apache.org/dist or
maven central then found to be bad
ii) a release that failed before the artifacts were published
I had been working to ii) but I can see there
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Stephen Flynn updated FELIX-2824:
-
Attachment: policy-required-bug-example-1.0.0-sources.jar
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990620#comment-12990620
]
Stephen Flynn commented on FELIX-2824:
--
Attached bundle should demonstrate the issue.
On Friday, February 4, 2011, Jeremy Hughes hugh...@apache.org wrote:
Just to be clear does failed release mean:
i) a release whose artifacts were published e.g. to apache.org/dist or
maven central then found to be bad
Afaik, maven central has since a lng time a policy to never change
a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990671#comment-12990671
]
Felix Meschberger commented on FELIX-2824:
--
Thanks for testing trunk and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger reassigned FELIX-2824:
Assignee: Felix Meschberger
Components that have a ConfigurationPolicy value of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2766?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2766.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Felix Meschberger
I chose a slightly different
Well, I'm on the fence. On the one hand, I doubt that it helps much to
skip the release number but granted, it might help for the bookkeeping
in rather strange cases. On the other hand, it can suck a bit to not
have a 1.0.0 version for example but at the same time, it's not super
important either
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2741?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990743#comment-12990743
]
Richard S. Hall edited comment on FELIX-2741 at 2/4/11 9:13 PM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990744#comment-12990744
]
Simon Chemouil commented on FELIX-2819:
---
By the way, if you're not doing it already
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990744#comment-12990744
]
Simon Chemouil edited comment on FELIX-2819 at 2/4/11 9:14 PM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990744#comment-12990744
]
Simon Chemouil edited comment on FELIX-2819 at 2/4/11 9:17 PM:
Assuming my vote counts, something I'm not sure about since I'm not a
felix committer and I never could work out that part of the rules
On 4 February 2011 17:17, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 2/4/11 12:10, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
In that case I change my non-binding B vote
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990756#comment-12990756
]
Alasdair Nottingham commented on FELIX-2819:
That said, works is all you'll
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990755#comment-12990755
]
Alasdair Nottingham commented on FELIX-2819:
Words alone cannot express my joy
On 2/4/11 16:23, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
Assuming my vote counts, something I'm not sure about since I'm not a
felix committer and I never could work out that part of the rules
Technically, only PMC members vote count for legal purposes, but for
something like this, I think we can use what
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2819?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990756#comment-12990756
]
Alasdair Nottingham edited comment on FELIX-2819 at 2/4/11 9:34 PM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990768#comment-12990768
]
Felix Meschberger commented on FELIX-2824:
--
With the refactoring of FELIX-2578
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2824?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger resolved FELIX-2824.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed in Rev. 1067309 by setting up the configuration support
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2741?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12990801#comment-12990801
]
Ancoron Luciferis commented on FELIX-2741:
--
That could indeed be an issue.
I'm
41 matches
Mail list logo
