Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it
now does not follow the established convention.
Is it going to be cleaned up?
-Chris
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.comwrote:
lol
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY
I'm not in favor to recreate a maven-3.1 tag to avoid confusions and we
need to keep the maven-3.1.0 which was used in the release
But I agree to improve our release/RCs/Staging process as far as it remains
as automated as possible.
It is already complexe to release stuffs on Apache side and I
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham chrisgw...@gmail.com wrote:
Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it
now does not follow the established convention.
Is it going to be cleaned up?
I sincerely hope not! That would involve potential for confusion
On 16 July 2013 09:44, Fred Cooke fred.co...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham chrisgw...@gmail.com wrote:
Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it
now does not follow the established convention.
Is it going to be cleaned up?
I
Isn't the convention way to omit the last zero? This has been done for
Maven and all plugins/components before.
No, we have 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 for the Maven core distro. Plugins would/could
be a different story though.
/Anders
Mike
Hi Jason,
It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0
I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th
June) ?
I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ?
Cheers,
-
Arnaud Héritier
http://aheritier.net
Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT
10/10 to Jason for not reusing the existing tag name! 3
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Jason,
It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0
I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th
Am 2013-07-15 20:57, schrieb Arnaud Héritier:
Hi Jason,
It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0
I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th
June) ?
I suppose we need to drop the old maven-3.1 tag ?
Cheers,
Isn't the
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Fred Cooke fred.co...@gmail.com wrote:
10/10 to Jason for not reusing the existing tag name! 3
I didn't say I was against to use different tags for each release attempt
:-)
But what do we do with old tags ?
From my point of view we have to remove them to avoid
Sure, drop the older one.
On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jason,
It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0
I think that the the right one to keep is the second one (893ca28 - 28th
June) ?
I suppose we need to
Agreed, but as discussed the nicer appaoach would be to use tags in the
form 3.1.0-0...N and then point the final tag at the hash pointed to by the
successful spin's tag, if you insist on this whole respinning thing.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl ja...@tesla.io wrote:
Sure,
done
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jason van Zyl ja...@tesla.io wrote:
Sure, drop the older one.
On Jul 15, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jason,
It seems we have 2 tags in Git for maven 3.1 : maven-3.1 and maven-3.1.0
I think that the the right
What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If
you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets
done to the SCM. (more or less)
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@gmail.comwrote:
done
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM,
uh, another bot?
Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit :
What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If
you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no matter what gets
done to the SCM. (more or less)
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Arnaud
maven 3.1 : a47ef06832bff888928c66c525e18439b7a3c0f3 (June 23rd)
maven 3.1.0 : 893ca28a1da9d5f51ac03827af98bb730128f9f2 (June 28th)
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Fred Cooke fred.co...@gmail.com wrote:
What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right. If
you have a
lol
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY herve.bout...@free.frwrote:
uh, another bot?
Le lundi 15 juillet 2013 22:28:26 Fred Cooke a écrit :
What was the hash for future reference? This is why sebb is sooo right.
If
you have a unique coordinate, you're good for life, no
16 matches
Mail list logo
