Mainly because there is a similar test in TCK.

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Jason Dillon <[email protected]> wrote:

> Um, what is the point of jaxrs annotations on an interface?
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2010, at 12:14 AM, Michael Elman wrote:
>
> > Sorry to be the bad guy. But due to
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WINK-275
> > I'll vote -1.
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Mike Rheinheimer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 from me.
> >>
> >> As of this reply, we're up to:
> >>
> >> [5 ] +1  (3 binding, 2 non-binding)
> >> [ ] +0
> >> [ ] -1
> >>
> >> Ideally, I'd like to see all committers vote.  Please submit your vote
> >> if you've not yet done so!  Thanks!
> >>
> >> mike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Mike Rheinheimer <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>> (I sent this email 10:00pm US CST April 22, but nobody got it.  Don't
> >>> know what happened, but I'm resending it now.)
> >>>
> >>> Hi Winkers,
> >>>
> >>> I'm calling a vote to release Wink 1.1
> >>>
> >>> The Maven staging area is at:
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-014/
> >>>
> >>> The distributions are in:
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-014/org/apache/wink/wink-assembly-dist/1.1-incubating/
> >>>
> >>> This release is tagged at:
> >>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wink/tags/wink-1.1-incubating
> >>> (revision 937139)
> >>>
> >>> The vote will be open here for at least 72 hours.  I'll keep the vote
> >>> open until Tuesday May 27 at 8:00am US CST (93 hours) since the
> >>> weekend is here.
> >>>
> >>> Please make special note of the language used to describe JAX-RS
> >>> specification compliance in the
> >>> apache-wink-1.1-incubating/docs/Apache_Wink_User_Guide.pdf and
> >>> apache-wink-1.1-incubating/release_notes.txt files.
> >>>
> >>> Guide to testing staged releases:
> >>> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1
> >>> [ ] +0
> >>> [ ] -1
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> mike
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to