Yes, and sorry again for a bit of hectic handling of this.
After I triggered the vote on Friday, over the weekend I realised I want
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-62
in too, but was unable to sit in front of my machine (kids and family
programme). As MINDEXER-62 it introduces a new
Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
I call this vote closed and failed failed: no votes happened at
all. Binaries are dropped, will rollback the SVN too in any moment.
Thanks,
~t~
AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
And PASSED !!!
IMHO Here was a thread discussion not a vote.
2012/9/17 Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.net:
Thanks for everyone participating this forum and hijacking the voting!
I call this vote closed and failed failed:
Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
confusion.
Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote anyway.
Thanks,
~t~
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Olivier Lamy ol...@apache.org wrote:
AFAIK vote thread is here http://markmail.org/message/hcrmm2v3pumhzwnh
And PASSED
If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
that you could.
-Chris
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.netwrote:
Yup, I realised this too late, that am at wrong thread. Sorry about the
confusion.
Anyway, I am withdrawing the vote
On 18 Sep 2012, at 00:42, Chris Graham wrote:
If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
that you could.
FWIW, from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:
Generally the community will cancel the release vote if anyone identifies
serious problems, but
Ok. Fair enough. :-)
-Chris
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Stuart McCulloch mccu...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 Sep 2012, at 00:42, Chris Graham wrote:
If the vote has been held and passed, can you withdraw it? I didn't think
that you could.
FWIW, from
On Thu, September 13, 2012 7:05 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Manfred Moser manf...@mosabuam.com
wrote:
I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
until
it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
and stay up
That's exactly what I think too!!
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
- Original Message -
From: Manfred Moser manf...@mosabuam.com
To: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 7:04:09 AM
Subject: Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
On Wed
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a
PM
Subject: Re: Release of Maven Indexer 5.0
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar
and...@hammar.net wrote:
I fully agree with you and I'm actually
On Thu, September 13, 2012 6:52 am, Mark H. Wood wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
I think that the cost is only so high because companies keep waiting
until
it is too painful. If you constantly keep upgrading a bit here and there
and stay up to date with
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Manfred Moser manf...@mosabuam.com wrote:
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net
wrote:
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Mark H. Wood mw...@iupui.edu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:04:09PM -0700, Manfred Moser wrote:
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net
wrote:
I fully agree with you
Howdy,
there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truejqlQuery=project+%3D+MINDEXER+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%225.0.0%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
https://github.com/apache/maven-indexer/commits/trunk?page=1
So, I'd like
Should MINDEXER-60 really have a fix version as it is won't fix? It
could trick people just browsing the list of tickets associated with
this relaese to think this has been introduced.
/Anders
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.net wrote:
Howdy,
there are a
hey,
do you believe https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-52 is fixed in 5.0?
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.net wrote:
Howdy,
there are a notable changes in trunk of MI:
Milos,
yes I think it is, since all of it is _removed_. See issue
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-57
and related commits.
Only integration I tested is... Nexus. So, you could give it a spin in NB
for example...
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Milos Kleint
Thats' good :)
But seriously, there are two related commits (one doing it, and one undoing
it). All I wanted it to simply cover those and have a history for that
change in JIRA too
Thanks,
~t~
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
Should MINDEXER-60
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.net wrote:
Milos,
yes I think it is, since all of it is _removed_. See issue
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MINDEXER-57
and related commits.
Only integration I tested is... Nexus. So, you could give it a spin in NB
for
Actually, my hope was to have someone here say c'mon, not bumping to
Java6? Are you nuts? and then continue with, listen, you code _today_
something that will be hopefully used 3-4 years from today. But, you are
_prevented_ to leave something that is already dead _today_ for 3 years
(will be 6-7
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
etc that are Java 1.4 compatible, there might not be enough reasons.
I'm sure there are
if it matters, netbeans (the user the library is on 1.6 for a while
already), no problems whatsoever upgrading..
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tamás Cservenák ta...@cservenak.net wrote:
Actually, my hope was to have someone here say c'mon, not bumping to
Java6? Are you nuts? and then
Yup IMHO most of Maven indexer users are ide and/or repository
managers (most are probably already 1.6 required)
So perso I don't have any issues regarding moving to 1.6 required.
2012/9/12 Milos Kleint mkle...@gmail.com:
if it matters, netbeans (the user the library is on 1.6 for a while
the usual operations like indexing local repo, downloding remote index
and searching appear all working properly.
I had to change a place or two to call aquire+release methods on the context.
Milos
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Milos Kleint mkle...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
older Java platforms to upgrade. But as long as we provide libraries
Simple.
Two
On Wed, September 12, 2012 6:06 pm, Chris Graham wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote:
I fully agree with you and I'm actually of the opinion that the Java
community has a responsibility to provide enough reasons for those on
older Java platforms to
27 matches
Mail list logo
