Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

On May 8, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Ivan wrote: OK, thanks for all of your support, we pass the vote for Tomcat 7.0.0.1. I will promote it to central repository later. Three binding vote : Rick, Ivan, and Joe Bohn. Ivan, IMO, calling this vote was premature. No strict guidelines were broken, so

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

Thanks, Kevan ! 2010/5/10 Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com On May 8, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Ivan wrote: OK, thanks for all of your support, we pass the vote for Tomcat 7.0.0.1. I will promote it to central repository later. Three binding vote : Rick, Ivan, and Joe Bohn. Ivan, IMO,

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

OK, thanks for all of your support, we pass the vote for Tomcat 7.0.0.1. I will promote it to central repository later. Three binding vote : Rick, Ivan, and Joe Bohn. 2010/5/8 Ivan xhh...@gmail.com Hi, just find that while stopping the server, there is some exceptions about failing to

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

I promote the artifacts according to the instructions on the release-plugin site, but I did not find them in the centry repository maven2, would they be synched automatically ? Or any other steps I need to do ? Thanks ! 2010/5/8 Ivan xhh...@gmail.com OK, thanks for all of your support, we pass

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

It takes several hours for the sync to central to happen. They should be visible on the release repo on apache nexus immediately. thanks david jencks On May 8, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Ivan wrote: I promote the artifacts according to the instructions on the release-plugin site, but I did not find

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

Hi, just find that while stopping the server, there is some exceptions about failing to unregister some Tomcat MBeans, I guess that there is still some issues about MBean in Tomcat while I pull the codes. However, I did not think that it is a blocking error. If no objection, I would pass the vote

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

forget my +1 :-) 2010/5/5 Joe Bohn joe.b...@earthlink.net +1 (assuming the potential license issue mentioned below is not an issue) I was able to build and run the new tomcat image. The license issue pointed out last time is now resolved but there is one other potential issue. I noticed

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

On May 4, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Joe Bohn wrote: +1 (assuming the potential license issue mentioned below is not an issue) I was able to build and run the new tomcat image. The license issue pointed out last time is now resolved but there is one other potential issue. I noticed a number

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: On May 4, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Joe Bohn wrote: +1 (assuming the potential license issue mentioned below is not an issue) I was able to build and run the new tomcat image. The license issue pointed out last time

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

I think that our four version numbers could help us, while Tomcat always has three version number. In next iteration, we call our version 7.0.0.1, which means more changes are merged from Tomcat 7 dev tree .. 2010/5/5 Vamsavardhana Reddy c1vams...@gmail.com On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:45 PM,

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

IIRC I came up with the 4 digits and I was thinking exactly this, we can release many ports of a given tomcat release this way. Having the same number of digits as tomcat won't work. If they used 4 we'd be in trouble :-) thanks david jencks On May 5, 2010, at 5:43 PM, Ivan wrote: I think

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

Agree, We can just add a comment in its pom, which records the revision our external tomcat based on. -Rex 2010/5/6 Ivan xhh...@gmail.com I think that our four version numbers could help us, while Tomcat always has three version number. In next iteration, we call our version 7.0.0.1, which

[VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 Vote will be open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) Staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-002/ Source repo:

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

Everything built correctly and I don't see any obvious license or header problems this time. +1 On 5/4/2010 5:10 AM, Ivan wrote: Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 Vote will be open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0 (Second Try)

+1 (assuming the potential license issue mentioned below is not an issue) I was able to build and run the new tomcat image. The license issue pointed out last time is now resolved but there is one other potential issue. I noticed a number of files under jasper-el that are generated using