I think that sounds reasonable.
On 9 May 2014 12:30, Andrea Vibelli <avibelli(a)redhat.com> wrote:
That is fine from my point of view.
This means that:
1) aerogear-parent 0.2.0 is broken until aerogear-misc 0.1.2 is released on
Central (it uses 0.1.2)
2) after aerogear-misc 0.2.0 is eventually removed from Central, we could
remove also the corresponding tag 0.2.0 from upstream repo
Thanks
Andrea
Matthias Wessendorf-2 wrote
> Hi,
>
> Andrea reported that the 0.1.2 release (see [1]) contains the wrong
> version
> number (0.2.0).
> This artifact was already pushed to maven central.
>
> On IRC we had the following idea:
> * update master to 0.1.2-SNAPSHOT
> * perform the release again (that hopefully will result in 0.1.2 on maven
> central)
>
> That still means we have a 0.2.0 on maven central. I will ask my contacts
> at Sonatype to remove the 0.2.0 bits;
>
> If folks are OK w/ that, I am happy to perform these steps by Monday
> morning
>
> Greetings,
> Matthias
>
> [1]
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-misc/blob/0.1.2/pom.xml
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev@.jboss
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
View this message in context:
http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-aerogear-misc-rele...
Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev