I'll upload the 11 Axis2 and 11 CXF artifacts into the M4 branches local
repo and update the pom.xml if someone will either respin/republish the
build for me or walk me through how to do it....:-)
-Donald
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Can't argue with #2. I can't see how these got picked up and it is
> sloppy. I'm ok with knocking this set of binaries down. Although, I'm
> not sure I want to invest more time on this milestone as there are lots
> of functional pieces to fix.
>
> Anyone else want to put together an M4 or shall we pass this month?
>
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2007, at 1:51 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I'm -1 on releasing as is because of (2). I think our binaries should
>> be cleaner that that :-/
>>
>> I don't think (1) is significant. There is no functional change from
>> applying the patch from GERONIMO-2941.
>> (3) also doesn't bother me.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2007, at 2:57 AM, Rakesh Midha wrote:
>>
>>> I think we need to look into following issues:
>>> 1. Initial startup error caused by
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2941
>>>
>>> 2. Why is that in console's Application section and deployment
>>> list-module, I see all the modules twice?
>>> One with the version 2.0-M4, appears as started and one with version
>>> 2.0-M4-SNAPSHOT stopped. All the modules also have two folders for
>>> two versions.
>>> Its not causing any error or exception, but i am just worried as this
>>> result in larger size of zip/gz and installed folder, and may also
>>> have other effects.
>>>
>>> 3. Shutdown error.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Rakesh
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/3/07, *Jacek Laskowski* <jacek@laskowski.net.pl
>>> <mailto:jacek@laskowski.net.pl> > wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Jacek
>>>
>>> On 4/1/07, Matt Hogstrom < matt@hogstrom.org
>>> <mailto:matt@hogstrom.org>> wrote:
>>> > I have placed the 2.0-M4 binaries out on http://people.apache.org/
>>> > ~hogstrom/2.0-M4-rc1 for you to take a look at. (They are
>>> uploading
>>> > as I write this).
>>> >
>>> > I have done some testing with DayTrader. There is an issue in
>>> > connecting with he MDB container which still needs to be worked out
>>> > so the application will not deploy as is. However, given the
>>> scopwe
>>> > of function DayTrader covers as well as all the late code drops I
>>> > don't see an issue with that. Smaller samples should be ok and
>>> tests
>>> > look good. Given that we're in the final stages of testing I'd
>>> like
>>> > to get this Milestone on the wire as is and fix issues in trunk.
>>> > Users that pull this binary and report issues will help us in the
>>> > Drive to 5.
>>> >
>>> > Other than that limitation I think this Milestone looks ready
>>> to go.
>>> >
>>> > After reviewing the content please cast your vote.
>>> >
>>> > [ ] +1 - Release these binaries
>>> > [ ] 0
>>> > [ ] -1 Do not release these binaries (provide reason)
>>> >
>>> > This vote will conclude on April 4th at 0600 Eastern.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks!
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jacek Laskowski
>>> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|