Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-dev] [External] : EclipseLink 2.7.9


I think I got your point. Can you try the zip from, please?


On 6/8/21 6:15 PM, William Dazey wrote:

Ignore my previous email. I accidentally hit the send button early.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 10:25 AM Lukas Jungmann
<lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

so this is perhaps what you want to double check:*rt*eclipselink*milestones*3.0.2*RC1*eclipselink-plugins-3.0.2.v20210604-e7fc271759.zip__;Ly8vLy8v!!GqivPVa7Brio!Lowt5JfuBcLlxfzK_AZElM2MoERuWcwJUuOSwc6aL4wiPkGc6J_S-uS3rJdzauKQj0A$

reachable from;!!GqivPVa7Brio!Lowt5JfuBcLlxfzK_AZElM2MoERuWcwJUuOSwc6aL4wiPkGc6J_S-uS3rJdzsks0sos$

At first glance, it looks like this is better. I will still need to
upload to our builds to make sure everything checks out properly.

I did have two notes:

1) The individual bundle names


Compared to 2.7.8 from eclipse downloads.

Do we mean to use the qualifier "v202106042222" for 3.0.2 artifacts?
In the past, YYYY/MM/DD format seemed to be enough, to we need the
timestamp too? Also, we are not including the git hash? It was a bit
useful personally to know what commit that build matches up to.

2) The manifest `Bundle-Version`

     Bundle-Version: 3.0.2.SNAPSHOT

Compared to 3.0.2-RC1 on central.
     Bundle-Version: 3.0.2.RC1

Compared to 2.7.8 from eclipse downloads.
     Bundle-Version: 2.7.8.v20201217-ecdf3c32c4

Do we mean to call the 3.0.2 a SNAPSHOT? I don't know if this is wrong
per-say, but it is a difference I noticed and want to bring it up in
case it isn't supposed to look like this.

Will Dazey
eclipselink-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit;!!GqivPVa7Brio!Lowt5JfuBcLlxfzK_AZElM2MoERuWcwJUuOSwc6aL4wiPkGc6J_S-uS3rJdzxvcYETk$

Back to the top