I missed antelders +1 vote and only noticed this today via this link:
http://old.nabble.com/-VOTE--Release-MRUnit-version-0.8.0-incubating-td33113645.html
As such, the vote passes with:
4 +1 Patrick Hunt, Chrs M, antelder, Brock Noland
0 -1
Patrick Hunt, Chrs M, antelder are all members
Looks good to me, +1
...ant
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Brock Noland wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> wrote:
>>> OK, I switch my VOTE to +1. The update worked perfectly:
>>
>> Great!
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> OK, I switch my VOTE to +1. The update worked perfectly:
Great! We only need one more +1 from an IPMC member. Is there a list
somewhere? I bothered Tom White last time so I'd prefer to bother
someone else.
Cheers,
Brock
-
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Brock Noland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> OK, I switch my VOTE to +1. The update worked perfectly:
>
> Great! We only need one more +1 from an IPMC member. Is there a list
> somewhere? I bothered Tom Whi
OK, I switch my VOTE to +1. The update worked perfectly:
[chipotle:~/tmp/mrunit-0.8.0] mattmann% curl -O
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/mrunit/KEYS
% Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent
Hi Brock,
I'm -1 on this release.
checksums check out:
mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.tar.gz
mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.tar.gz.sha1 mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.zip.md5
mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.tar.gz.asc mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.zip
mrunit-0.8.0-incubating-dist.zip.
On 12 January 2012 12:35, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:26:49PM +, sebb wrote:
>> On 12 January 2012 12:08, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:37:18AM +, sebb wrote:
>> >> > How is this most easily accomplished? Checkout tag from SVN then
>> >> >
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:26:49PM +, sebb wrote:
> On 12 January 2012 12:08, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:37:18AM +, sebb wrote:
> >> > How is this most easily accomplished? Checkout tag from SVN then
> >> > manually diff against the artifact, or some other way is
On 12 January 2012 12:08, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:37:18AM +, sebb wrote:
>> > How is this most easily accomplished? Checkout tag from SVN then
>> > manually diff against the artifact, or some other way is
>> > better/easier?
>>
>> I checkout the SVN tag and explode
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:37:18AM +, sebb wrote:
> > How is this most easily accomplished? Checkout tag from SVN then
> > manually diff against the artifact, or some other way is
> > better/easier?
>
> I checkout the SVN tag and explode the archive(s) in the same parent
> directory, and then
On 11 January 2012 18:44, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 11 January 2012 18:06, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:59 AM, sebb wrote:
On 11 January 2012 17:49, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>>> In this case the files are exactly the same, th
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 11 January 2012 18:06, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:59 AM, sebb wrote:
>>> On 11 January 2012 17:49, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>> In this case the files are exactly the same, there is no difference
>> btw the contents of the two a
On 11 January 2012 18:06, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:59 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 11 January 2012 17:49, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>>> +1 sig/xsum match up, tested clean and RAT reports fine.
>>>
>>> It's a bit odd to me that there are two source release artifacts here
>>> (one archiv
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:59 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 11 January 2012 17:49, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>> +1 sig/xsum match up, tested clean and RAT reports fine.
>>
>> It's a bit odd to me that there are two source release artifacts here
>> (one archived with tar/gz the other with zip), I've not seen that
On 11 January 2012 17:49, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> +1 sig/xsum match up, tested clean and RAT reports fine.
>
> It's a bit odd to me that there are two source release artifacts here
> (one archived with tar/gz the other with zip), I've not seen that for
> other projects. Typically you want to have a
+1 sig/xsum match up, tested clean and RAT reports fine.
It's a bit odd to me that there are two source release artifacts here
(one archived with tar/gz the other with zip), I've not seen that for
other projects. Typically you want to have a single source release
artifact. You could then create "c
Hi Sebb,
There have indeed been some changes. This is something that IMHO
can be updated on the next release. I've filed a JIRA issue to track it.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRUNIT-52
And will fix it.
Cheers,
Chris
On Jan 10, 2012, at 6:06 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 9 January 2012 23:52
On 9 January 2012 23:52, Brock Noland wrote:
> This is an incubator release for Apache MRUnit, version 0.8.0-incubating.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311292&version=12316359
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by [3 work
This is an incubator release for Apache MRUnit, version 0.8.0-incubating.
It fixes the following issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311292&version=12316359
*** Please download, test and vote by [3 working days after sending].
Note that we are voting upon t
19 matches
Mail list logo
