commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [all] Commons SCXML 0.8 RC1 available
Date Sun, 11 May 2008 13:56:47 GMT
On 11/05/2008, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your time sebb, comments below ...
>
>  On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Niall Pemberton
>
> <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 1:03 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >> On 10/05/2008, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >>>
>  >>>  I plan on cutting RC2 mid next week. In the mean time, if anyone has
>  >>>  other comments about RC1, please post here.
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> Looks good.
>  >>
>  >> Some very minor nits:
>  >>
>  >> * It would be nice if the source and javadoc manifests had a bit more
>  >> detail in them, for example adding the following from the binary
>  >> manifest:
>
> <snap/>
>
>  Yup, I agree the manifests can be better. I don't have much time for
>  this during the Commons SCXML v0.8 release. As Niall says, I'll try to
>  look for a Commons-wide solution if I have any cycles for this down
>  the road.
>
>
>
>  >
>  > For any of our m2 releases, this is only going to happen when someone
>  > provides a solution - probably by sumitting a patch to the
>  > sources/javadocs plugins:
>  >
>  > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-source-plugin/
>  > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-javadoc-plugin/
>  >
>  > Niall
>  >
>  >> Implementation-Title: Commons SCXML
>  >> Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation
>  >> Implementation-Vendor-Id: org.apache
>  >> Implementation-Version: 0.8
>  >> Specification-Title: Commons SCXML
>  >> Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation
>  >> Specification-Version: 0.8
>  >>
>  >> * There's no need for the .asc.sha1 and .asc.md5 digests.
>  >>
>
> <snip/>
>
>  Indeed, there isn't: http://markmail.org/message/w7behn7tacpr2lca
>

I've reviewed some recent builds that did not have these extra files,
but perhaps they were built with M1 or something.

>
>  >> * Building with M1 gives:
>  >> DEPRECATED: the default goal should be specified in the <build>
>  >> section of project.xml instead of maven.xml
>  >> ...
>  >> java:jar:
>  >>    [echo] java:jar is deprecated and will be removed. Please use jar:jar
>  >>
>
> <snap/>
>
>  Using m1.0.2? Thats the recommended version in Commons (see building
>  page in site, for example).

No, that would have been  1.1.

I have got 1.0.2 installed, but I thought that was only needed for
Java 1.3 builds.

>
>
>  >> * Perhaps the M1 build should be deleted?
>  >>
>
> <snip/>
>
>  Not immediately. I still use it and it works well.
>

OK.

>
>
>  >> * The tests generate rather a lot of INFO output.
>  >>
>
> <snap/>
>
>  I'm not bothered by that (but if more people think it should be
>  reduced, I can do that). Additionally, since I need to cut RC2 with
>  JDK 1.5, I want to make zero changes to Java sources/tests between RC1
>  and RC2 (RC1 was built with JDK 1.4, so we'd trivially know the
>  sources are OK for a 1.4 target).
>

I'm not very happy with using Java 1.5 to get round problems in M2.

Seems to be cheating to me.

AIUI, this is intended to be an M2 release, and is supposed to be
targetted at 1.4+ - yet it's not possible to regenerate the build
using Java 1.4 and M2.

I know this affects a lot of Commons projects - all the more reason
for the M2 bug to be sorted...

>
>  -Rahul
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message