Re: [udig-devel] 1.2.0 rerelease (with improved sdk)

[Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@xxxxxxxxx>]

I sent out the release announcement so you should be good to go.

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Magnus Jungsbluth <mju@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Jody,
>
> 1.2.0 is available on the website, which is where I got it from :)
>
> I can certainly assist you with setting up the maven artifacts and building
> geotools jars as osgi bundles. This would ease the use of udig for a lot of
> people who use maven to build their applications. How shall we proceed? I
> think you will concentrate on getting 1.2.0 out of the door. Just message me
> if you want to discuss maven / osgi integration...
>
> The build number is also a problem with maven, since version labels(the 4th
> part) work differently in osgi and maven environments (the qualifier in osgi
> behaves slightly different to a SNAPSHOT suffix in maven).
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: udig-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:udig-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Im Auftrag von Jody
> Garnett
> Gesendet: Montag, 16. August 2010 09:50
> An: User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS
> Betreff: Re: [udig-devel] 1.2.0 rerelease (with improved sdk)
>
>
> We have not announced 1.2.0 yet; this is a development list where we
> are sorting out (and sharing the QA tasks) associated with the
> release.
> I would love to provide maven release artifacts; indeed if you can set
> us up with the build process it would be even more cool to offer the
> geotools library as osgi plugins.
>
> You will note that each release has a different build number 1.2.0.xxxxxx
>
> It is my sincere hope that this release on the 15th passes QA; the
> issues that held it back (svg and splash screen) were not that
> serious.
>
> Jody
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Magnus Jungsbluth <mju@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> is there any reason why the re-release isn't called 1.2.1 if there were
>> changes to the source?
>>
>> We are using maven to build our eclipse product und put the uDig sdk into
> our
>> internal maven repository (with eclipse:to-maven). Any time a version is
>> re-released this causes pulling of some teeth since maven only allows one
>> content behind one version tag (which is sensible I think). So if we
> replace
>> 1.2.0 with 1.2.0' all former builds based on 1.2.0 become irreproducible
>> because they share the same version tag.
>> While this is not a real problem because 1.2.0 has been released so
> recently,
>> this can cause some serious trouble.
>>
>> Just my 2c, I am not sure if you were aware of these implications. Are
> there
>> any plans to provide the uDig sdk as maven artifacts by the way?
>>
>> Keep up the good work, udig is an awesome product!
>>
>> /Magnus
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: udig-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:udig-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Im Auftrag von Jody
>> Garnett
>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 15. August 2010 12:41
>> An: User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS
>> Betreff: [udig-devel] 1.2.0 rerelease (with improved sdk)
>>
>>
>> Okay this second release attempt is now on the website.
>>
>> I also have some good news with respect to SDK; I have manually copied the
>> files around into the correct structure so that the sdk can see GeoTools
>> source code.
>>
>> I have a bug report here (which could use someone handy with bash):
>> - https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/UDIG-1719
>>
>> Jody
>>
>> On 15/08/2010, at 2:57 AM, andrea antonello wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jody, as decided i have merged the fixes we did since the 1.2.0 tag
>>> from trunk.
>>>
>>> The revision is: 31953
>>>
>>> The tag revision was:  31934 -> tag 1.2.0
>>>
>>> following here the revisions since the tag and whether I merged them in:
>>> 31936
>>> no 31937
>>> 31938
>>> 31939
>>> 31940
>>> 31941
>>> 31942
>>> 31943
>>> no 31944
>>> 31945
>>> 31946
>>> 31947
>>> 31948
>>> 31949
>>> 31950
>>> no 31951
>>> 31952
>>>
>>> There were two bigger issues:
>>> - imageio-ext giving problemas, but I setteled that manually on
>>> 1.0.6-1, which is what we had.
>>> - I still can't get a geotools 2.6.5 build, so to test the merge
>>> result I had to put the 1.2.0 tag on geotools 2.6-SNAPSHOT. Since you
>>> are the only man living having a 2.6.5 geotools (is it really true or
>>> are you faking us? :) ), you will have to do the switch and commit it
>>> on the tag.
>>>
>>> Anyways, after the merge I tested walkthrough 1 and everything went well.
>>>
>>> two comments:
>>> - page 18, the host is www .refraction.net    -> there is a space
>>> after the www, which is breaking heavy metal copy-paster as me :)
>>> - page 25, point 10 talks about the symple style page, but the image
>>> below is from the themed page. There is no image from the simple style
>>> page
>>>
>>>
>>> Ciao
>>> Andrea
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
>>> http://udig.refractions.net
>>> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
>> http://udig.refractions.net
>> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
>> http://udig.refractions.net
>> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> http://udig.refractions.net
> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> _______________________________________________
> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> http://udig.refractions.net
> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
>