camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Camel 2.10.4 and 2.9.6 releases
Date Thu, 21 Feb 2013 02:52:36 GMT
Looks like I have some problem uploading the artifacts during 
release:perform. I may have to redo this release.

Thanks for the patience,
Hadrian

On 02/19/2013 02:53 PM, Christian Müller wrote:
> Thanks for the update!
>
> Sent from a mobile device
> Am 19.02.2013 06:48 schrieb "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hzbarcea@gmail.com>:
>
>> The full tests are still running, looks like I'll only finish the release
>> tomorrow.
>> Hadrian
>>
>> On 02/18/2013 08:43 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>
>>> The cxf features 2.6.6.1 are now released. I'll do the release builds
>>> today for camel-2.10.4. If you have any more fix for 2.10.4 that must go
>>> in, please let me know now.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>> On 02/15/2013 09:10 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, vote for cxf 2.6.6.1 fixing the features issue is under way, due to
>>>> close tomorrow.
>>>> Hadrian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/15/2013 06:26 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is another security issue in CXF that may require a release.
It's
>>>>>> being investigated now. The backup option is to make a copy of the
cxf
>>>>>> features in camel temporarily. We'll know in a couple of days and
>>>>>> redo the
>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Any update on this?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   Cheers,
>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 02/09/2013 09:47 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Claus, there is :). It's the -P validate profile in
>>>>>>> platforms/karaf/features that caught it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah the cxf 2.6.6 features are pretty much unusable. I am sure
Dan
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> do something about it. Instead of reverting to 2.6.5 there is
also the
>>>>>>> option of copying the relevant features from cxf to camel (or
all of
>>>>>>> them), which could be a temporary fix for the cxf community (don't
use
>>>>>>> the cxf features, use the camel ones). That's what I am ready
to do,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>> I'll wait for Dan's comment first.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02/09/2013 03:02 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fixed the msv issue and hit another one. Looks like the
>>>>>>>>> apache-cxf-2.6.6-features.xml [1] is invalid:
>>>>>>>>> ${cxf.james.mim4j.version} is
>>>>>>>>> not resolved :(.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ah darn. CXF 2.6.5 does not have that issue, so in worst
case we can
>>>>>>>> revert to this version.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As Camel, Karaf, SMX etc may have similar issues in the future
with a
>>>>>>>> feature file having ${ } unresolved placeholders.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe there should be a maven goal that checks for this.
>>>>>>>> I assume there is some Maven Ninjas that can put together
the XML
>>>>>>>> plugin stuff needed for this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then we catches this during before releasing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   This looks like the only issue that remains to workaround.
I'll try
>>>>>>>>> to build
>>>>>>>>> the releases over the weekend.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/**org/apache/cxf/karaf/apache-**
>>>>>>>>> cxf/2.6.6/apache-cxf-2.6.6-**features.xml<http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/cxf/karaf/apache-cxf/2.6.6/apache-cxf-2.6.6-features.xml>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 02/08/2013 07:56 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tests are failing for me in full builds. I am working
on it and
>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>> release asap.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 02/08/2013 04:21 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea
>>>>>>>>>>> <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason still not clear to me, my
mail client didn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> get the
>>>>>>>>>>>> original thread started by Claus. That points
to consensus that
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 2.10.4. I started a full build overnight
and I am
>>>>>>>>>>>> planning to
>>>>>>>>>>>> build
>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2.10.4 release later this week, Wed or
Thu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any update on this?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>   Regarding 2.9.x, we did decided a while ago
to support 2 versions
>>>>>>>>>>>> back,
>>>>>>>>>>>> right? So even if we wouldn't need a 2.9.6
release now, it should
>>>>>>>>>>>> still be
>>>>>>>>>>>> supported until 2.11.0 is out. However with
almost 50 issues
>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed, I
>>>>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>>>> we should get 2.9.6 out the door as well,
so I'm planning to
>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>> it this
>>>>>>>>>>>> week as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything you're working on that
should make it into
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.10.4 and
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.9.6? Please shout now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>

Mime
View raw message