+1
Better to fix the versions.
On Sep 17, 2013, at 4:46 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
yeah, I like that idea!
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
Maybe we should specify versions per dependency to avoid troubles in the
future.
Thoughts?
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> works here too, but not sure if that is really 'correct';
>
> According to Kris (on IRC), something changed during our release so
> that 'ruby-1.9.3-p429' is now required.
>
> I guess I let the Ruby lovers clear up that.
>
> @Erik: thanks - now I can at least build the site :-)
>
--
abstractj
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev