On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 03:59:16PM -0500, Mark wrote:
1. Under windows I don't have ssh. Maybe there is an opensource version
available?
When I was a windows user I used both openssh on cygwin and Putty. Openssh for
commands on my machine that needed ssh support (cvs, svn, etc) and Putty
Mark,
If that doesn't work, try Tor:
http://tor.eff.org/
This one gets by most corporate firewalls...but not all.
Jeff
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Hi Mark,
For more native ssh client, try putty. You can get a windows installer
for it at:
(From a tangential discussion on pmc@, this came up and Alan noted this
would be better discussed here, so I'm just moving it here)
It's been 5 months since the M3 milestone release, and a *tremendous*
work has gone into the project since then.
We think we're functionally complete (or very
+1
I support this as long as it doesn't require a lot of resources.
Mark
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
(From a tangential discussion on pmc@, this came up and Alan noted
this would be better discussed here, so I'm just moving it here)
It's been 5 months since the M3 milestone release, and a
Yup agreed.
Any task needed for this, please let me know.
-Sandip
--- Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
I support this as long as it doesn't require a lot
of resources.
Mark
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
(From a tangential discussion on pmc@, this came
up and Alan noted
this would
I am considering the idea of splitting up the interop module into two
different pieces: interop and interop-corba.Moving forward, the
interop module will need to make some calls into OpenEJB and
OpenEJB/interop will both require generated corba related classes. The
OpenEJB dependency
+1...alot of people have commented on this, so this would be good.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
(From a tangential discussion on pmc@, this came up and Alan noted this
would be better discussed here, so I'm just moving it here)
It's been 5 months since the M3 milestone release, and a
Mark wrote:
I am considering the idea of splitting up the interop module into two
different pieces: interop and interop-corba.Moving forward, the
interop module will need to make some calls into OpenEJB and
OpenEJB/interop will both require generated corba related classes. The
OpenEJB
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
-1
We'll ignore this as it isn't a vote :)
Whilst I agree with the intention, we do not have a process defined
that would allow us to generate a reproducable release. This led to
several of the issues with the last M3 release that ultimately
Thoughts on naming :
How about stopping with the M* convention, and do something like
Geronimo 0.8. It reflects our nearness to a released version, it is
not a 1.0 so no one should have expectations of 1.0 functionality, and
we can rapidly get to 1.0 in the next month or -ish.
geir
On Mar 29,
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:40:13 -0800, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-1
Whilst I agree with the intention, we do not have a process defined that
would allow us to generate a reproducable release. This led to several
of the issues with the last M3 release that ultimately made is
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
-1
We'll ignore this as it isn't a vote :)
Whilst I agree with the intention, we do not have a process defined
that would allow us to generate a reproducable release. This led to
several of the issues with the last M3
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
-1
We'll ignore this as it isn't a vote :)
Whilst I agree with the intention, we do not have a process defined
that would allow us to generate a reproducable
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
-1
We'll ignore this as it isn't a vote :)
Whilst I agree with the intention, we do not have a process defined
that would allow us to
On Mar 29, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Heh. I was just thinking about that, and also about the subject of
OpenEJB - would there be good benefit into bringing it to Geronimo?
We seem to be so interdependent...
Well, hopefully that will change. I would
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 12:12:25PM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Is now a good time to talk about how Geornimo needs its own remote
maven repo?
Heh. I was just thinking about that, and also about the subject of
OpenEJB - would
1. Agreed. This should be a non-issue shortly.
2. This is a tall order, IMHO. I think that this is a goal that should
be vigorously sought but I don't think that it should stop a milestone
release. Maybe a v1.0 release, I'll grant you that.
Regards,
Alan
David Jencks wrote:
I will -1 any
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 12:39:17PM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Heh. I was just thinking about that, and also about the subject of
OpenEJB - would there be good benefit into bringing it to Geronimo?
As usual, I'm afraid I was less clear than mud.
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:09 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
1. Agreed. This should be a non-issue shortly.
I'm not referring to the current maven detects circular dependencies
in uber-build problem but rather the problem that the uberbuild is the
only
If there are some people with extra time, committer or not, we could *really*
use nightly releases. Strike that, developers build Geronimo several times
daily, it's the community that needs nightly releases.
We need a bash, jelly, or even java program that can:
NIGHTLY-RELEASE (run if
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:29:14 -0800, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As usual, I'm afraid I was less clear than mud.
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:09 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
1. Agreed. This should be a non-issue shortly.
I'm not referring to the current maven detects circular
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:03:30 -0800, Dain Sundstrom
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1000
Anyone that has time, please help with this one. This would be a huge
help to the whole community.
-dain
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:39 AM, David Blevins wrote:
If there are
Should we target this to be the same as the release process, but use
latest revision tag rather than a version #? Two birds?
On Mar 29, 2005, at 2:03 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
+1000
Anyone that has time, please help with this one. This would be a huge
help to the
This should just be integrated into the maven build
$ maven deploy-release
or something
--
Jeremy
David Blevins wrote:
If there are some people with extra time, committer or not, we could *really*
use nightly releases. Strike that, developers build Geronimo several times
daily, it's the
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 10:29:14AM -0800, David Jencks wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:09 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
2. This is a tall order, IMHO. I think that this is a goal that
should be vigorously sought but I don't think that it should stop a
milestone release. Maybe a v1.0 release,
Why not use http://geronimo.apache.org/maven? It is the private
website for geronimo anyway. Also we include these jars in our
distribution, so we should be able to host them in on apache hardware
(if not we have bigger problems).
-dain
--
Dain Sundstrom
Chief Architect
Gluecode Software
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
As Alan brought it up, what are the thoughts on a maven repo dedicated
to the artifacts needed to build/distribute Geronimo?
With the new infrastructure it may be possible to locate this at the
ASF in the project's zone. However, as I understand ASF policy they do
not
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Why not use http://geronimo.apache.org/maven?
As I said:
With the new infrastructure it may be possible to locate this at
the ASF in the project's zone. However, as I understand ASF policy
they do not allow the standalone distribution of non-ASF code (e.g.
a Jetty archive
28 matches
Mail list logo
