commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [COLLECTIONS] 3.3 RC1 for review
Date Thu, 21 May 2009 15:24:41 GMT
On 21/05/2009, Henri Yandell <> wrote:
> I don't expect this to pass the first vote - they never do :)
>  ---
>  Tag:

Which revision is this? I'm assuming r777000 (nice number!)

Two files don't have AL headers:


This means the .pom file is also missing the AL header.

NOTICE.txt says:
Copyright 2001-2008

README.txt includes full details of the Ant targets, but does not
mention any Maven targets. It should mention the ones that correspond
to the Ant details.

The directory:


is empty and could perhaps be deleted?

>  Site:

It would be useful to mention the Java version requirement more
prominently, e.g. on the front page and/or in the dependencies report.

The ApacheCon logo is out of date.

>  Binaries:

It would be useful to record the Md5 hashes, because the same file
names will be used for RC2 etc:







It would also be useful to include the file name in the MD5 and SHA1 files, e.g.

40e4cb46b2d6332ba52ca300716e3bdc *commons-collections-3.3.pom

The tgz and zip archives agree with each other, and the source archive
agrees with SVN apart from CRLF/LF differences and times in SVN $Date:
markers, which are unfortunately expressed in local time.

Source builds and tests OK using:
* Ant 1.7.1/Java 1.3.1
Total time: 4 minutes 14 seconds

* Maven 2.10/Java 1.4.2
Tests run: 13023, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 43.422 sec

I've no idea why the Ant tests take so much longer.
Part of it is probably that they run as separate tests, but surely
that cannot account for all the extra time?

Are there some tests missed out by Maven?

The jars all have N&L files.

It would be nice if the javadoc and source jar manifests included the
Specification and Implementation headers. See commons-compress pom.xml
for how to add these.

-1 based on the missing AL headers and wrong Copyright year.

>  Clirr:
>  Jardiff:
>  ---
>  Currently I've noticed that the site/release notes say 'JDK 1.2' when
>  in fact it's 1.3 source/target from a 1.5 JDK. Also the test jar is
>  not deployed to the Maven repository. That can be done manually if
>  desired.
>  I'm interested in what others find.
>  Hen
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>  For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message