commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver Heger <oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Configuration 2.1 based on RC3
Date Sun, 14 Aug 2016 19:41:42 GMT


Am 13.08.2016 um 22:29 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> I would support another RC that clearly documents what the requirements are
> for different parts of the build.

And what would make the big difference to adapted documentation on the side?

Gary, I fail to understand your motivation. In the past you stated
frequently that our release process is a PITA and you keep repeating the
RERO mantra. But now you make the release process even more of a PITA,
and you effectively block a release that has been asked for by users
multiple times.

I think your behavior causes harm to our users and this community as it
generates a lot of frustration. Please reconsider your -1 vote.

Oliver

> 
> Then IMO we should switch trunk to Java 7.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Aug 13, 2016 12:37 PM, "Oliver Heger" <oliver.heger@oliver-heger.de>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Am 12.08.2016 um 20:11 schrieb Gary Gregory:
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Dennis Kieselhorst <deki@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 12.08.2016 um 01:18 schrieb Gary Gregory:
>>>>> -1
>>>>>
>>>>> From src zip: ASC, MD5, SHA1 OK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Building with:
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da;
>>>> 2013-02-19
>>>>> 05:51:28-0800)
>>>>> Maven home: E:\Java\apache-maven-3.0.5
>>>>> Java version: *1.6.0_45*, vendor: Sun Microsystems Inc.
>>>>> Java home: E:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.6.0_45\jre
>>>>> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
>>>>> OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
>>>>>
>>>> Is it really necessary that the site build is possible with JDK 1.6?
>>>
>>>
>>> For me, keeping it simple is nice. If we say we have different
>> requirements
>>> for building jars vs. building the site, we are making our lives more
>>> difficult IMO.
>>
>> Okay, I have no interest in fixing the site build on Java 1.6 because I
>> do not think it is worth the effort. I belief that not many users will
>> build the site, and even less will do this on a JDK 1.6. It may also
>> well be the case that it is not possible to come to a solution which
>> supports both Java 1.6 and 1.8.
>>
>> So from my PoV we have the following options regarding this release:
>>
>> a) Accept the RC as is and ignore this issue.
>>
>> b) Add a note to the building documentation that the site build requires
>> a minimum JDK of 1.7. This is a change of the site and does not require
>> another RC.
>>
>> c) Switch to JDK 1.7 for [configuration]. I do not think that this is a
>> good solution because then all Java 6 users are out of the game for no
>> good reason.
>>
>> d) I step back as RM and make room for more capable people.
>>
>> Please tell me your preference.
>>
>> Oliver
>>
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>> I
>>>> checked the history and Oliver updated the findbugs-plugin with comment
>>>> "The site build now works with Java 1.8.". Site build with JDK 1.8 works
>>>> fine for me. I assume problems problems, if we downgrade it again and
>>>> would prefer that it works with latest JDK version.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Dennis
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>>
> 

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


Mime
View raw message