From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 13:36:12 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 50353 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 13:36:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 13:36:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 32911 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:36:00 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 32664 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:35:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 32653 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 13:35:59 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:35:59 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nz-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:36:01 +0000 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id z31so2319242nzd for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:35:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=iNSCXWAnhlBPvTEeuv6JYHNrUF1ZOwAocpZWGfD62Jc=; b=ZUddwP12vc6F89yHIEK6wnVQN/R8/Il8fw+v7nweqwZTTpeHvzetTjUOUij1eMETEEuoSbjWRy6C9flB0wuyuwCZgyR2FumAdr8x59OP4YjO05bFpmwZlEaRuumtBMqG81Q5YO++WXQzPZtzdWIw7V2u+09RMPRr76NCZVtZthY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=Vr4bm7kg1yszkLvMzUw3ZssrKfZrObfH1JK0S8kN4ZeHI5nlb7TakqFwobvO+DCwqodnOdMT+euw7T1iG7I1P2a5bh5+5gzYqVutDBK9QWBI23cpryTRHEN3HALmkVsPbeTVCrI8GwrIHMNT3TH8FYYozFxp6z24oJn9AJieozo= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id k1mr561393wam.1191245739528; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 06:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 09:35:39 -0400 From: "Musachy Barroso" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: license header on ftl files MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Do we "have to" put the license header on .ftl files? Some of the examples on the doc will look weird as the header is way bigger than the actual code: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/ajax+theme musachy -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 13:43:30 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 51986 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 13:43:27 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 13:43:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 53921 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:43:14 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 53883 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:43:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 53872 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 13:43:14 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:43:14 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nz-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:43:16 +0000 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id z31so2321182nzd for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=1bwW9bzylaPp1gx8BHY0PTsGDhQ0Cji9oVdIlZQOke0=; b=YHJQBIjPFKwGN6G/soci67w8WwJHuDrhkvni0RomIt48eA24t/6dJ/R2edxWBRge1DdveHFxNBu5frPo4JOLCx9z+4IX4WVbXxYFmLcw3eMOsgRswRCH5PEQQdybjjWEXwNm0boW4AyD+FdsnpuIz33FEzW212CLGz1/9zSvyd8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=KDnopgMrZ2FrXL0Z2FpVvIPwPJeofNlaK3dwJCOwnc3S38cTrDtkLdBDKmExd2OyEaPyauanba0FCAJFLX3EuLd/jJrTY5NksV45Gbq8IJ4putSqMH8XYBbZ7Zf2Gee+WK4Tkt/vdhHN0Bfi5PIB/jT/FpwsrvYG5vCnYPoM4Ro= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id v1mr754659wac.1191246169889; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 06:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 09:42:49 -0400 From: "Ted Husted" <jmurphy@example.com> Sender: jmurphy@example.com To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: ba68317fbe49848b X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org We can create a build without moving to a release. I'd really like to "tap the keg" on 2.1.x. Another issue we should address is our reliance on Rainer and me as release managers. It's simply not acceptable for either project to grind to a halt because a single volunteer is on vacation. If the XWork release process is documented someplace, I"d be happy to give a try myself. At least then Rainer and I could backup each other. -Ted. On 9/28/07, Ian Roughley <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > I think he might be on vacation. > > Musachy Barroso wrote: > > Any idea when that might be? I haven't seen Rainer on #struts for a > > couple of weeks :) > > > > musachy > > > > On 9/28/07, Antonio Petrelli <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > > >> 2007/9/28, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: > >> > >>> I'd like to propose 7 Oct 2007 as a tag date for the 2.1.0 version. If > >>> anyone would be interested in helping with the build, please don't be > >>> shy! > >>> > >> > >> Ted, sincerely I wish to wait until XWork 2.1 is released, so we don't have > >> any snapshot dependency. > >> > >> Antonio --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 13:57:31 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 57369 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 13:57:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 13:57:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 89865 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:57:07 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 89813 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 13:57:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 89778 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 13:57:07 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:57:07 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO wr-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:57:09 +0000 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id q50so1959031wrq for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:56:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=8N+OMflPDtbiHWzBLqM7L/cbHA66sUAWIJySTQydk88=; b=r7WfVpuD02URFSGki09RcOAg5It86uCZDKxNCqmDK/AuixKT7fjvFRkGVmuglfpxFwpTNYNtCME7V8ZB5R/xX0SaB5HPcgRMCXGkglCluBRj2Tn8CDiqGPzVu7G6Hlk0EQ7bSJDe1bsLpzBGaqzMtrbEWbhjpEvATX8B3AVGGAc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=pbZ7wu0tgZUogjCrzWUHko1n6ljKj/aIIcqXWusHpIkrMenP28PYK9W+u+0mXby3Vr3F+O5kWdBzoNB9z7tX6TSLFM4KfXQv2IiDHqsaTJMADwUX+mcwCF6xid4dCuulhKKORXp6UZzw6dmPTDHDLqq9Vfc2AeCgS1Nt89YMhYU= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id z20mr1915165agb.1191247001094; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 06:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 06:56:41 -0700 From: "Wendy Smoak" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 10/1/07, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > We can create a build without moving to a release. I'd really like to > "tap the keg" on 2.1.x. There was some talk of using the Maven Release Plugin for Struts 2.1, did that get worked out? Keep in mind that the release plugin will not let you proceed until all snapshot dependencies have been removed. (Tagged builds are supposed to be reproducible, and they can't be if they involve snapshots.) -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 14:04:20 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 59975 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 14:04:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 14:04:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 11810 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:04:06 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 11764 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:04:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 11753 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 14:04:06 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:04:06 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:04:07 +0000 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o4so2086240uge for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:03:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=pqhYtu52ZqxYq4O5plRDipMFxSm/H7LGh+ATNBQxRjQ=; b=djDoFNVyFZtt6ZzaMHuF2EXDByL22cCJSvYNUjbdSS54Mv4zJ5H4Oz6SGu/HYPDxoBZnvKBvqMesZh2Whlg8t8nS3uey9TP7U4HA34art7eOco+5WrY94DKMVcRg5TrNEyI/K9PPsbE7TnazrpGW+gZBNyj+Ra/mvMAifgSjeqI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=jlxT0Ysgx1hWl0mEbnerJKvkNJYJhh5V4hk2BP+H7Fal+JXeXo6E8nyxPoFDFUxYs87+11KQ9phIGANE3dAgZo5eE/FP8dgv1DYvco63XgXAN2BKJmBl8Bfr1Vn+/OGt6c3HbAQt0sSO1uPL40gyGB1Xdh3oawAAhMs4X+DbVBE= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id k9mr2451562ugh.1191247425352; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:03:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 07:03:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:03:45 +0200 From: "Antonio Petrelli" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_13491_646285.1191247425329" References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_13491_646285.1191247425329 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 2007/10/1, Wendy Smoak <jmurphy@example.com>: > > On 10/1/07, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > > We can create a build without moving to a release. I'd really like to > > "tap the keg" on 2.1.x. > > There was some talk of using the Maven Release Plugin for Struts 2.1, > did that get worked out? I think it should work, but I cannot be sure until I make a real test. In fact, I was thinking of volunteering for release (just to test the new release process), but until XWork 2.1 is released I cannot do much. Keep in mind that the release plugin will not let you proceed until > all snapshot dependencies have been removed. (Tagged builds are > supposed to be reproducible, and they can't be if they involve > snapshots.) XWork is the only remaining snapshot dependency: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2151 Antonio ------=_Part_13491_646285.1191247425329-- From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 14:12:38 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 63007 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 14:12:35 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 14:12:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 29022 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:12:21 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 28978 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:12:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 28962 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 14:12:21 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:12:21 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:12:23 +0000 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o4so2088208uge for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:12:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=gXbwvoAPg2kR1Hi6KOGinM0wzB0VZaUTwHYo7D6PlCo=; b=NTtFHCHeuqZ2iHDbeb8a34W7rsmEGhyzh2xXJtjn8BrCYyrq57Av4LTirO+yBsdLp8b5B1YbVHg3HJ4ONYfTluyKPzwYXLtC/cOPcJpEw1phhbD1SWzKxdHwx6LK5WEsRnpSuPgm/yJKgWeWwcZhF5BiEPw2M6X9el3KhYsXJzA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=mKq527eQDc9BBDPJA/Va0DlsABSd5HcwF41nb969vZ8r62pMPygN7jJtqbHPSOgZd0Ow5+AdHJj+yqJz3VjWjr6ekoumRZKhhCH6FxP3W78tBlqLvBwkAQ+6aeyo4IAAGGLoVGV4ZzQ46kEaICo3ypoC1uAzOjCpCqRYgy5iMnU= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id w14mr8899767ugh.1191247921386; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 07:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:12:01 +0200 From: "Antonio Petrelli" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: license header on ftl files In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_13609_11118168.1191247921378" References: <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_13609_11118168.1191247921378 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 2007/10/1, Musachy Barroso <jmurphy@example.com>: > > Do we "have to" put the license header on .ftl files? >From a "legal" POV, I suppose (and afraid) that it is necessary, since FTL files are creative works. See: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions Some of the > examples on the doc will look weird as the header is way bigger than > the actual code: > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/ajax+theme Is it only a question of appearance of the code itself, or do you experience rendering problems too? In the first case, why don't you leave only the interesting part of the code in the wiki pages? Antonio ------=_Part_13609_11118168.1191247921378-- From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 14:27:34 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 67126 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 14:27:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 14:27:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 54774 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:27:20 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 54596 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 14:27:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 54585 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 14:27:19 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:27:19 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nz-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:27:21 +0000 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id z31so2334065nzd for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:27:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=kjRoPbQw09iIS0wET8za67Lsa7QUFoIy1Ay6RBFm8X0=; b=Ic4zdX3yZdHcJyAJx4vzu83hLIW4woVlTY2nvfLi4wRv8yGkp4JVQnnHxom4yUDbxPGbSLILV68YvVG9ZChTdsOeTE9U1F9iajwzX3FeYdyLZnOfjnm0UKMsoH2miIpQ/sB/TkKrUUC7zg1p9BH5m/JUmt2IXbPqwXe7xSugyg4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=FtW5uJXCDKA3XpMiNP/EFQoDfQ4V7YbHoWzr0GmLrudhKVXmop067I1u8UghdtcBd3w+f/J79OQVUeO1MwROxFF6VPoVV1GMItXlIJnyJ1N0jQDeqFpDcnAnmtCb2crLnlVND1Et46kdcpO2Zagm01UX+I9ZAL9mMEbTqg/6k9E= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id 1mr725043wam.1191248818614; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:26:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 07:26:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 10:26:58 -0400 From: "Musachy Barroso" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: license header on ftl files In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > > Is it only a question of appearance of the code itself, or do you experience > rendering problems too? In the first case, why don't you leave only the > interesting part of the code in the wiki pages? No rendering problem, it just looks ugly. I just wanted to make sure we "had to" before using just the code on the wiki, it is better to link than duplicate but anyway :) musachy -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 15:30:30 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 23968 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 15:30:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 15:30:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 97969 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 15:30:17 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 97704 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 15:30:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 97693 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 15:30:16 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:30:16 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO newton.inversoft.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:30:17 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (unknown [83.161.120.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by newton.inversoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78F9235D4129 for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:28:31 -0600 From: Brian Pontarelli <jmurphy@example.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Struts Developers List <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: Exploring actionPackage-based configuration issues References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms010102020506050705030702" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --------------ms010102020506050705030702 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I'm happy with a hybrid mix of XML and annotations; however something > feels very > wrong about using the package-info.java file for holding the XWork > package level > annotations, so I'm trying to think of alternatives. I can understand the difficultly in using a new language concept that has little mindshare but I think that this is the standard location for that kind of configuration according to the Java language. Besides, this is the only clean way to ensure a single location of package level annotations and documentation. > I think the root problem is that I'm not 100% comfortable with model > of the > XWork Package. As I see it so far, its a container for configuration > information and for some reason that bothers me. I feel that there is an > application developer-exposed class waiting to be discovered. This is > probably > more of a struts 2.1++ issue, but I think the notion of an XWork > package is > missing something. (It might also be advisable over several releases to > consider renaming the XWork package concept so its not as confusable > with the > java package, but that's an orthogonal issue.) I definitely agree on the whole naming issue. It is difficult to talk to new developers about XWork packages without confusion. Are you suggesting that the XWork package needs more configuration control or that the concepts need to be separated or something else entirely? You sorta lost me here. > This feeling of unease is slightly exacerbated by some of the > difficulties I > have debugging package issues -- ie when playing with zero configuration > annotations and xml, there's does seem to be any good way to check > what package > an action has been assigned to confirm that defaults or annotations > are working. > config-browser exposes the namespace of an action, but not its > package, for > instance. This leads to the feeling that the XWork package is a > second-class > citizen in the framework, but I know its not. This is an interesting dilemma because the way XWork is configured implies reuse at the Action level and that Actions should not be coupled to the interceptor chain (to some degree). However, this is usually not the case. Most Actions I write are highly dependent on the interceptor chain and nearly never dependent on the namespace and often never reused (that's what I usually place in the service tier). However, most times it is a 95%/5% situation where I use the same interceptor chain for 95% of the application and a different chain for 5% (or less). Therefore, global defaults usually work best for me. This might not the norm, but my experience to date with 5 or so applications. Therefore, setting good global or XWork package defaults makes sense to me. Not sure what I'm getting at but it seems that the current configuration model makes good sense and works for all the cases I've had. > While I can see wanting some configuration control over the package -- > changing > namespaces; or the root of web content, in the case of SmartURLs; > changing > naming strategies -- feel like proper "configuration" tweak points > (and thus > more XML friendly). Ie these are things that I'd expect good default > coventions for, but things that in best practices are overridden in > XML. Things that you want to be able to change on multiple-deployments > without > re-compiling. Hmmmmm... I personally don't like the idea of changing namespaces or naming jmurphy@example.com. If you consider SEO, this is usually a bad idea unless you are really good about retaining existing URLs and doing proper 301 redirects. Otherwise, you'll upset the search gods and your ranking will drop considerably, not to mention the 3 months you'll have to wait to get re-ranked. Also, since I'm not huge on Action reuse, I'm perfectly fine setting namespaces using Java packages or annotations. And in my opinion, naming strategies should be fixed from the start and never changed. > While the other aspects -- interceptors, names and types (but maybe not > destination) of global results, which actions belong to this package, > etc are > "configuration" but not really end-user configuration. Its the wiring > that's > not expected to be changed. This is places where good conventions > overridden > by source code annotations makes the more sense. And at which point > having the > ability to programaticly configure an application starts to feel possibly > valuable. I'm sorta on the other side of the fence here. I don't really change interceptor chains too much and often when I do, changing the whole application is fine by me. Or if I need to change a single package, that's okay in XML or the properties file as well. Global results and package results are also usually a one time configuration for me and not something that Actions really need to know about. So, I usually find that I set these up in the struts.properties and struts.xml files and never touch them. So, having these defined in annotations is really not something I use much, jmurphy@example.com. I guess in the end, I'm fine with the way it all works now. I rarely hit a configuration problem that I just feel bad implementing using the current tools and often I tweak at the beginning and then never touch it again. But again, this is my cases and I'm sure folks do it other ways. I guess I'm just wondering what really seems to be your ideal configuration/coding solution, what configuration should Actions be aware of and what are you looking to control? -bp --------------ms010102020506050705030702 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIJDzCC AuIwggJLoAMCAQICEHZhobj40xitj+PQMzIBMpswDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwYjELMAkGA1UE BhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNVBAMT I1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBMB4XDTA2MTIxMTE1NTIwMFoX DTA3MTIxMTE1NTIwMFowRjEfMB0GA1UEAxMWVGhhd3RlIEZyZWVtYWlsIE1lbWJlcjEjMCEG CSqGSIb3DQEJARYUYnJpYW5AcG9udGFyZWxsaS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IB DwAwggEKAoIBAQCywEZnsGv/s9F+uQxQkxlncmK7dEo4HM5CidN1snO1upg1q2y9RtXg7ADF bL5yesgSxVe9kprW2ls2Sf9lPh1yZ5BYBjHiXNDD06ZdA7S8sJTQMTADD2n0Gxojh4Lju5HP cuNqkUTQGRlykXM/fJF01/H5mt871CpPiei8myDUxcUvc8Wz8ZpKpgRAokhejV5Bf9GGaXau FwnCzKr5IPgOXdPlpO+jO//HqRABIzR3CgRsarxQlZFyMlTJZJhRCayKcKPytlbBkwgu/sA0 RtTw0uHaTByea8c94DmNrxj6vrqmUYjNA2DVSX1xMDFxZxToMzcT9TvU5fyBOvz3t177AgMB AAGjMTAvMB8GA1UdEQQYMBaBFGJyaWFuQHBvbnRhcmVsbGkuY29tMAwGA1UdEwEB/wQCMAAw DQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADgYEAMmhSIsCyL3cmAOD8iM2tg+tELDmVczMPn0KsReJffZvz4VPf pU1Ht0otRNDXu681LDvI/4uTXZ46lqy2gzocWJizOD0wOHeuNgS/p/x4OvEYjxXD9PlGq2Fx KBUT5LngAyMFAs0WpZ7NcEzkvYW2Sv/gI8+/jGmLGqQih+oSWicwggLiMIICS6ADAgECAhB2 YaG4+NMYrY/j0DMyATKbMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlpBMSUwIwYDVQQK ExxUaGF3dGUgQ29uc3VsdGluZyAoUHR5KSBMdGQuMSwwKgYDVQQDEyNUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29u YWwgRnJlZW1haWwgSXNzdWluZyBDQTAeFw0wNjEyMTExNTUyMDBaFw0wNzEyMTExNTUyMDBa MEYxHzAdBgNVBAMTFlRoYXd0ZSBGcmVlbWFpbCBNZW1iZXIxIzAhBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWFGJy aWFuQHBvbnRhcmVsbGkuY29tMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAssBG Z7Br/7PRfrkMUJMZZ3Jiu3RKOBzOQonTdbJztbqYNatsvUbV4OwAxWy+cnrIEsVXvZKa1tpb Nkn/ZT4dcmeQWAYx4lzQw9OmXQO0vLCU0DEwAw9p9BsaI4eC47uRz3LjapFE0BkZcpFzP3yR dNfx+ZrfO9QqT4novJsg1MXFL3PFs/GaSqYEQKJIXo1eQX/Rhml2rhcJwsyq+SD4Dl3T5aTv ozv/x6kQASM0dwoEbGq8UJWRcjJUyWSYUQmsinCj8rZWwZMILv7ANEbU8NLh2kwcnmvHPeA5 ja8Y+r66plGIzQNg1Ul9cTAxcWcU6DM3E/U71OX8gTr897de+wIDAQABozEwLzAfBgNVHREE GDAWgRRicmlhbkBwb250YXJlbGxpLmNvbTAMBgNVHRMBAf8EAjAAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUA A4GBADJoUiLAsi93JgDg/IjNrYPrRCw5lXMzD59CrEXiX32b8+FT36VNR7dKLUTQ17uvNSw7 yP+Lk12eOpastoM6HFiYszg9MDh3rjYEv6f8eDrxGI8Vw/T5RqthcSgVE+S54AMjBQLNFqWe zXBM5L2Ftkr/4CPPv4xpixqkIofqElonMIIDPzCCAqigAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUF ADCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTATBgNVBAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2Fw ZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUgQ29uc3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIGA1UEAxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVt YWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25hbC1mcmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMB4X DTAzMDcxNzAwMDAwMFoXDTEzMDcxNjIzNTk1OVowYjELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoT HFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNVBAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25h bCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDEpjxV c1X7TrnKmVoeaMB1BHCd3+n/ox7svc31W/Iadr1/DDph8r9RzgHU5VAKMNcCY1osiRVwjt3J 8CuFWqo/cVbLrzwLB+fxH5E2JCoTzyvV84J3PQO+K/67GD4Hv0CAAmTXp6a7n2XRxSpUhQ9I BH+nttE8YQRAHmQZcmC3+wIDAQABo4GUMIGRMBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAwQwYDVR0f BDwwOjA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2NybC50aGF3dGUuY29tL1RoYXd0ZVBlcnNvbmFsRnJlZW1h aWxDQS5jcmwwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMCkGA1UdEQQiMCCkHjAcMRowGAYDVQQDExFQcml2YXRl TGFiZWwyLTEzODANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOBgQBIjNFQg+oLLswNo2asZw9/r6y+whehQ5aU nX9MIbj4Nh+qLZ82L8D0HFAgk3A8/a3hYWLD2ToZfoSxmRsAxRoLgnSeJVCUYsfbJ3FXJY3d qZw5jowgT2Vfldr394fWxghOrvbqNOUQGls1TXfjViF4gtwhGTXeJLHTHUb/XV9lTzGCA2Qw ggNgAgEBMHYwYjELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQ dHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNVBAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENB AhB2YaG4+NMYrY/j0DMyATKbMAkGBSsOAwIaBQCgggHDMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG 9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTA3MTAwMTE1MjgzMVowIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFFaN gOwRGupkUYEM48BMsB9wWPFrMFIGCSqGSIb3DQEJDzFFMEMwCgYIKoZIhvcNAwcwDgYIKoZI hvcNAwICAgCAMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgFAMAcGBSsOAwIHMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgEoMIGFBgkr BgEEAYI3EAQxeDB2MGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlpBMSUwIwYDVQQKExxUaGF3dGUgQ29uc3VsdGlu ZyAoUHR5KSBMdGQuMSwwKgYDVQQDEyNUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29uYWwgRnJlZW1haWwgSXNzdWlu ZyBDQQIQdmGhuPjTGK2P49AzMgEymzCBhwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxeKB2MGIxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlpBMSUwIwYDVQQKExxUaGF3dGUgQ29uc3VsdGluZyAoUHR5KSBMdGQuMSwwKgYDVQQDEyNU aGF3dGUgUGVyc29uYWwgRnJlZW1haWwgSXNzdWluZyBDQQIQdmGhuPjTGK2P49AzMgEymzAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQCr8muzoWIU+uqM1OCUqyTjkha8oIyxN7QwLSAtHrF6jZm/DIbP CvCB+z4u4iYcNVVCQ8Rvb57olYWdejcY8HCz2BqAx4TELIvZLp/sG6ZHJCs6e3rSjsC9QPBH KkJ+fU/tJZ9iNibfAJHgkK0VmLd+j8phV5KPSHXQ7DxjiCKWXpHV9LSQrXH9iHNLULbz2dTw MLkZ51s58DFJlloIuFYo9YZhQ7U1I5x+rJlh3E50lVJ3C9ZT1rZl6Iaj2QMYQCcxlmaPHdU5 gBuYhKtki3kFgSsTTcTf+IJfOpOg023E0GxU/daKkEgzftXrWCwq7s0cBjG7mPMn8mkajgXC B5aiAAAAAAAA --------------ms010102020506050705030702-- From jmurphy@example.com Mon Oct 01 15:31:38 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 25421 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2007 15:31:37 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 15:31:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 2452 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 15:31:24 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 2415 invoked by uid 500); 1 Oct 2007 15:31:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 2404 invoked by uid 99); 1 Oct 2007 15:31:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:31:24 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO wa-out-1112.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:31:26 +0000 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m38so5241044waf for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:31:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=2NntAfQBW5YCnEZhtQMMfjiKAevV9ssBUfu1aePfg1A=; b=Gvu4FF01ZRpfng6Tg7ylmLpsc4ysCcM4aSn+HLb/XczryWKVP+c2BuRfQWOm0jSZoUrD4rp1aSIcnLXIT4lzcPZROUFQMmDh2yCHNijKeUKCVnxCNJ1lr8sTchwJlPFRblg8fimUEgCLdeE4yixgBTdqwcPAmjO+j/usxnubc44= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=rIlb1zdAJ0ggjsrCh4bPnnTLprnmkm10IGP9N1J5G6+XjgQkltpje3VAoNe5g+F/z5PQsD1K7cTJLB9aYByOglz+Zbd32x+69FWPK2qlEevYaQJ9FWTbKyVHekEqIA2s2v3zHtxBXJrfpj6MT6J2u59gblt/ur3ZXFIi7gDCa4k= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id c1mr912561wal.1191252665229; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:31:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 08:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 11:31:00 -0400 From: "Ted Husted" <jmurphy@example.com> Sender: jmurphy@example.com To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 2.0.11 Quality In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 62c2037e03996424 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 GA On 9/24/07, James Holmes <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > The Struts 2.0.11 test build is now available. > > Release notes: > > * http://struts.apache.org/2.x/docs/release-notes-2011.html > > Distribution: > > * http://people.apache.org/builds/struts/2.0.11/ > > Maven 2 staging repository: > > * http://people.apache.org/builds/struts/2.0.11/m2-staging-repository/ > > Once you have had a chance to review the test build, please respond with a vote > on its quality: > > [ ] Leave at test build > [ ] Alpha > [ ] Beta > [ ] General Availability (GA) > > Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are > considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and > more +1s than -1s. > > The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, longer upon request. A vote can > be amended at any time to upgrade or downgrade the quality of the release based > on future experience. If an initial vote designates the build as "Beta", the > release will be submitted for mirroring and announced to the user list. Once > released as a public beta, subsequent quality votes on a build may be held on the > user list. > > As always, the act of voting carries certain obligations. A binding vote not only > states an opinion, but means that the voter is agreeing to help do the work. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 05:15:07 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 4125 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 05:15:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 05:15:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 47898 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:14:49 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 47860 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:14:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 47849 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 05:14:49 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:14:49 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO h1149922.serverkompetenz.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:14:50 +0000 Received: by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix, from userid 48) id 787441B3657; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:14:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 83.161.120.155 (SquirrelMail authenticated user hermanns) by www.aixcept.net with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:14:28 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> References: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:14:28 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 2.0.11 Quality From: "Rainer Hermanns" <jmurphy@example.com> To: jmurphy@example.com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.10a-1.fc6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 GA cheers, Rainer > The Struts 2.0.11 test build is now available. > > Release notes: > > * http://struts.apache.org/2.x/docs/release-notes-2011.html > > Distribution: > > * http://people.apache.org/builds/struts/2.0.11/ > > Maven 2 staging repository: > > * http://people.apache.org/builds/struts/2.0.11/m2-staging-repository/ > > Once you have had a chance to review the test build, please respond with a > vote > on its quality: > > [ ] Leave at test build > [ ] Alpha > [ ] Beta > [ ] General Availability (GA) > > Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members > are > considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s > and > more +1s than -1s. > > The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, longer upon request. A > vote can > be amended at any time to upgrade or downgrade the quality of the release > based > on future experience. If an initial vote designates the build as "Beta", > the > release will be submitted for mirroring and announced to the user list. > Once > released as a public beta, subsequent quality votes on a build may be held > on the > user list. > > As always, the act of voting carries certain obligations. A binding vote > not only > states an opinion, but means that the voter is agreeing to help do the > work. > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 05:20:00 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 6173 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 05:19:59 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 05:19:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 50977 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:19:47 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 50929 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:19:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 50918 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 05:19:47 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:19:47 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO h1149922.serverkompetenz.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:19:48 +0000 Received: by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix, from userid 48) id A597B1B3652; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:18:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 83.161.120.155 (SquirrelMail authenticated user hermanns) by www.aixcept.net with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:18:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:18:57 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan From: "Rainer Hermanns" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.10a-1.fc6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Don is busy with some important refactorings and enhancements for XWork 2.1. But I think that until these already commited changes are fully tested and stabilized, no xwork 2.1 release will happen. There are some other open xwork issues, that need to be addressed prior to a release. cheers, Rainer > 2007/9/28, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: >> >> I'd like to propose 7 Oct 2007 as a tag date for the 2.1.0 version. If >> anyone would be interested in helping with the build, please don't be >> shy! > > > > Ted, sincerely I wish to wait until XWork 2.1 is released, so we don't > have > any snapshot dependency. > > Antonio > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 05:59:36 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 22271 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 05:59:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 71231 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:18 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 71209 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 71198 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:18 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:59:18 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO wx-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:59:20 +0000 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s14so221697wxc for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id o14mr11383359wxo.1191304738677; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:58:58 +1000 From: "Don Brown" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'm pretty much done, actually. The only other major thing I was considering, but probably won't get to, was removing commons-logging. I'll try to spend some time to help close out 2.1 issues. Don On 10/2/07, Rainer Hermanns <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > Don is busy with some important refactorings and enhancements for XWork 2.1. > But I think that until these already commited changes are fully tested and > stabilized, no xwork 2.1 release will happen. > > There are some other open xwork issues, that need to be addressed prior to > a release. > > cheers, > Rainer > > > 2007/9/28, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: > >> > >> I'd like to propose 7 Oct 2007 as a tag date for the 2.1.0 version. If > >> anyone would be interested in helping with the build, please don't be > >> shy! > > > > > > > > Ted, sincerely I wish to wait until XWork 2.1 is released, so we don't > > have > > any snapshot dependency. > > > > Antonio > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 06:00:11 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 22938 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 06:00:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 06:00:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 72115 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:58 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 72075 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 72064 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 05:59:58 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:59:57 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 83.161.120.155 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of jmurphy@example.com) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO wx-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:59:59 +0000 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s14so221697wxc for <jmurphy@example.com>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:59:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id 8mr11386064wxz.1191304778907; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:59:38 +1000 From: "Don Brown" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org As the Struts 2.1.0 release won't be GA, what about releasing an XWork 2.1-beta1 release? Don On 10/2/07, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > I'm pretty much done, actually. The only other major thing I was > considering, but probably won't get to, was removing commons-logging. > I'll try to spend some time to help close out 2.1 issues. > > Don > > On 10/2/07, Rainer Hermanns <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > Don is busy with some important refactorings and enhancements for XWork 2.1. > > But I think that until these already commited changes are fully tested and > > stabilized, no xwork 2.1 release will happen. > > > > There are some other open xwork issues, that need to be addressed prior to > > a release. > > > > cheers, > > Rainer > > > > > 2007/9/28, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: > > >> > > >> I'd like to propose 7 Oct 2007 as a tag date for the 2.1.0 version. If > > >> anyone would be interested in helping with the build, please don't be > > >> shy! > > > > > > > > > > > > Ted, sincerely I wish to wait until XWork 2.1 is released, so we don't > > > have > > > any snapshot dependency. > > > > > > Antonio > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 07:10:37 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 38031 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 07:10:36 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 07:10:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 12821 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 07:10:20 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 12773 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 07:10:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 12759 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 07:10:20 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 00:10:20 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 07:10:21 +0000 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o4so2265086uge for <jmurphy@example.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 00:10:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=WTUEmcGfcNnETdFjo+aTG0nPxXyN0u2PCHWdEnph3Z8=; b=QiRDpKEoTu35JFC3kM+TILZdlV4NRNQS4zm4ISW3wU9eECcdihOf5Pv4qYhGnyZ0t+/lvt07g+DyuVE6tsOTFYpAjU9s3Fp+Sx+E7YN9TDIuE+lJ5GbiQ2xjO/wNIKMxc+K901E+AVKZ7JkGdg1K2y3xfTtQug7E5cno2UyyQsU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=QK/pqUH1Csj58N8JfrAM+qmY/VSP7x9EFlmUO1I9vIa0zq4hB+22+M73mW4L85dk0d4KRma4XGdD2/22bD63L0s7p8+BrS0QWoyy50EH4sO55/wtg9m8gK35yTWzhWDnxSM4/cc0iAHcDc9FUrlyYo3c2BF4wN7Bb+2AOljiHFQ= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id y3mr583358ugh.1191309000399; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 00:10:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 00:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:10:00 +0200 From: "Antonio Petrelli" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_19903_27791485.1191309000392" References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_19903_27791485.1191309000392 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 2007/10/2, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com>: > > As the Struts 2.1.0 release won't be GA, what about releasing an XWork > 2.1-beta1 release? Or even alpha :-) Antonio ------=_Part_19903_27791485.1191309000392-- From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 11:48:02 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 26925 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 11:48:01 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 11:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 34676 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 11:47:45 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 34661 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 11:47:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 34650 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 11:47:45 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:47:45 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nz-out-0506.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 11:47:47 +0000 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id z31so2616160nzd for <jmurphy@example.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:47:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=INI4wrN/Gtlyw1UCD11JK8YjatNkLd1jbD5BDRllUpE=; b=RJmzEM1jRBMOPPpQ694PRAmcKJnv8H1b747cad3Flp0IVSGC9eZPMgGOcmJVISzG6SP9oiduE8AwHERf67SzPMIVF4IfEkzGEn3Lj39E+f6xu7AEcTss4b07qKq8gztxxSbFEpt7UDu+nbDA/JaV/3Mkp7KR+UovzFtflcE0He8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=YSd8FbcuAF4TNnAQ0HeZlxT9sXw9F/vcaDW90v4k33A+zScx5OLdiAZSty3rqYemzWWfZUf+XbgrC3q/80hDbj6zC7IuJRxNQNev+tGEgXwzYbdleLaAIGy/XkxEMUqGS3WbcIhLKsueBOtRBfBA9N/C3EaiZDEhtLdDL353Uv8= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id v1mr2244186waf.1191325644882; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 04:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:47:24 -0400 From: "Ted Husted" <jmurphy@example.com> Sender: jmurphy@example.com To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1221a78d90c8c97b X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'd strongly prefer that XWork continue to utilize the same milestone release system that Struts uses. Under this system, we could issue a XWork 2.1.0, with no hope of voting it GA, just as we want to do with Struts 2.1.0. Later, we could issue XW 2.1.1 and Struts 2.1.1, try them both together, and if all is well, vote XW GA and then Struts GA, without re-releasing any new artifacts. If we had done this a year ago, we could have had a Struts GA release in Septermber 2006, rather than February 2007. -Ted. On 10/2/07, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > As the Struts 2.1.0 release won't be GA, what about releasing an XWork > 2.1-beta1 release? > > Don > > On 10/2/07, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > I'm pretty much done, actually. The only other major thing I was > > considering, but probably won't get to, was removing commons-logging. > > I'll try to spend some time to help close out 2.1 issues. > > > > Don > > > > On 10/2/07, Rainer Hermanns <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > > Don is busy with some important refactorings and enhancements for XWork 2.1. > > > But I think that until these already commited changes are fully tested and > > > stabilized, no xwork 2.1 release will happen. > > > > > > There are some other open xwork issues, that need to be addressed prior to > > > a release. > > > > > > cheers, > > > Rainer > > > > > > > 2007/9/28, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: > > > >> > > > >> I'd like to propose 7 Oct 2007 as a tag date for the 2.1.0 version. If > > > >> anyone would be interested in helping with the build, please don't be > > > >> shy! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ted, sincerely I wish to wait until XWork 2.1 is released, so we don't > > > > have > > > > any snapshot dependency. > > > > > > > > Antonio > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > > For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com > > -- HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 12:08:25 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 37074 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 12:08:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 12:08:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 56039 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 12:08:12 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 55997 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 12:08:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 55986 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 12:08:11 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:08:11 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO el-out-1112.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:08:13 +0000 Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id r27so939455ele for <jmurphy@example.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:07:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=8DEEb3KGJWKFCO2GOHgQ6++WpF5BI/phA5bR+wF+XsU=; b=YJ+MKVSALfL/1Giz2VoRbr/3cHvB2nDpytPnOLTYCbwutO8v8+C6n8AUndAoHdqnhbQLH4ePWmL1I3Kn6+/6K5h1069cj5oIk8Gmg+FTx19GjSze+DjYh34ZZsTdGN6WS3uZm6rJLXCI0OFgnNRkFkmwu8chJqCE8jbZ/p2UNdU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=KUVDWX6KN5LjS5VXBft+3vIllVFQAJNZqEe0BajI0Ugaa2Y6/PmhrSsB2jBXe8YpY5DUm3O/dGNHSrclcIiIV/kViXk3HMaRCeU6QLoMf3y5t+IAr/YzexIEXFxE/KO1OodzB2MwZ5H73KfHf8SB2qeHEvIEROtyJ9Y+YrFPhZ0= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id s1mr2251234wab.1191326851863; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 05:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 14:07:31 +0200 From: "Antonio Petrelli" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3612_8016299.1191326851700" References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_3612_8016299.1191326851700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 2007/10/2, Ted Husted <jmurphy@example.com>: > > we could issue a > XWork 2.1.0, with no hope of voting it GA, just as we want to do with > Struts 2.1.0. Later, we could issue XW 2.1.1 and Struts 2.1.1, try > them both together, and if all is well, vote XW GA and then Struts GA, > without re-releasing any new artifacts. It is a pretty interesting process, but probably the vote call should be changed. There will be a "two-phase" vote, where: - in the first phase, we vote if we want the test build released (without mentioning the quality); - in the second phase we vote the quality. Thoughts? Antonio ------=_Part_3612_8016299.1191326851700-- From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 12:39:26 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 50341 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 12:39:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 12:39:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 98305 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 12:39:08 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 98281 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 12:39:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 98269 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 12:39:08 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:39:08 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:39:08 +0000 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b21so2551062nfd for <jmurphy@example.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:38:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=f2FWjQrGQ6m0jtEZI1itcF0c+pu22LufkBGxZQLD3RI=; b=QpCOejfkYAQG7DLoRZTdQA/HZ8j7s7JwAqUYWnT4Zge6Q+1voKUImUhiwT1g8afFs3npthdWLNlp+p7MfZB3z8nL4RJQe8sEngh6ELWDSFq9EnVAXNraw2fVezHXUyGQRpV8g8cijI31LsQzVoESMKey9+V/9x/AqzR09q0q9C0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=pI6cyD95G59oIe7hm3fZPGOFORn+HO3Ro+7PsS68N7cx4LLVAMGP71b8ijWkysx988eyghPWHp91FYsNUeeHQiaoT+7oi1b+zxkc2FiPPs5eYt66CsN0BmWgIIFH8GndOIp5sm8Mk3kGtETs50N2bSUvNDueIwnb/Z8DmYixlSQ= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r1mr4525740wab.1191328725593; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 05:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:38:45 -0400 From: "Ted Husted" <jmurphy@example.com> Sender: jmurphy@example.com To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2f81bc51445ad08e X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org We can have as many phases as we like. We often vote a distribution as "beta" first, and announce it to the use list, and then depending on that experience, vote again and reclassify the "beta" to "GA". A key idea is that we should be releasing the same set of bits that we tested, without change. Aside from the people here, our only other testing group are subscribers to the Struts user mailing list. We need to release a set of bits to that group, let everyone test it, and if the bits are joyful, declare them GA. The quality we assign to a release should not be a matter of personal belief, it should be determined by what we have found through actual experience in the field. Of course, we could do something like distribute a set of bits tagged as a "release candidate", and if the RC is found joyful, we could copy or rename the tag, build a distribution from the same tag, and call it the GA. But, of course, those would not be the same bits, only very similar bits. Even if we assume that we can build an equivalent distribution from the same tag under a new name, all the helpful souls who have been using these bits in production would have to change JARs again. An approach like this simply creates more work for everyone, without producing a single tangible benefit. (How rude!) If later we find a problem with a release, we should also downgrade it from GA to beta, or Alpha. Actually, we should do this with the releases prior to 2.0.9, since I don't think any of us would recommend that those distributions be used in production. -Ted. On 10/2/07, Antonio Petrelli <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > It is a pretty interesting process, but probably the vote call should be > changed. There will be a "two-phase" vote, where: > - in the first phase, we vote if we want the test build released (without > mentioning the quality); > - in the second phase we vote the quality. > Thoughts? > > Antonio > -- HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: jmurphy@example.com From jmurphy@example.com Tue Oct 02 13:10:38 2007 Return-Path: <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 65602 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2007 13:10:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2007 13:10:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 56930 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 13:10:21 -0000 Delivered-To: jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 56871 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2007 13:10:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jmurphy@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Help: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:jmurphy@example.com> List-Id: "Struts Developers List" <dev.struts.apache.org> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list jmurphy@example.com Received: (qmail 56860 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2007 13:10:21 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 06:10:21 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jmurphy@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO el-out-1112.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 13:10:21 +0000 Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id r27so949444ele for <jmurphy@example.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 06:10:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=hxYSs6INLywP1ekmGYGf3rIt+Q9+1uaaVJtsFQGrApU=; b=V22f8JxWG39LOZ+y6PnkPK+akLvhGHk1tVdwUnIm+dUMC6O7Rg+NyoWWeyI+IMjSokMkpiNurdC/BY7aWyf7R/8oC1Uj5awO74d/pqUAiJdnfwy2E8OSMegWIA7vpLkx+25h9kDyTIbMcR9d3FDIULiPnjudaMlEKezB4ESFj4o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Dr9w1gYew/i1lJUNytULTGUFr0lYeV1ZOOa17/URYwSuZ0I/h9G/LAGs+m0xaYohTWlhw+F5iLzwavM9RrkR0wp6KskcGTuewftZU2as5HezbvzGRfGGZY2OyR45v1PHl0Dr1PJUf5N1ERoW177Vud4UTrYADfJkrwhYsBxq1Pg= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id u1mr2366256waf.1191330598911; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 06:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 06:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <jmurphy@example.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:09:58 -0400 From: "Musachy Barroso" <jmurphy@example.com> To: "Struts Developers List" <jmurphy@example.com> Subject: Re: 2.1.0 Build/Release Plan In-Reply-To: <jmurphy@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> <{{EMAIL+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}}> <jmurphy@example.com> <jmurphy@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'm using it for development and it is working fine so far. musachy On 10/2/07, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > As the Struts 2.1.0 release won't be GA, what about releasing an XWork > 2.1-beta1 release? > > Don > > On 10/2/07, Don Brown <jmurphy@example.com> wrote: > > I'm pretty much done, actually. The only other major thing I was > > considering, but probably won't get to, was removing commons-logging. > > I'll try to
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}