Re: [orbit-dev] Added commons.net 3.2.0 to Orbit

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> But I’m wondering whether we even want a library with a severe known regression in Orbit … and if we do,
> what’s the best way warning other potential adopters, such that they don’t run into the same problem when they pull Commons Net 3.2 from Orbit ?

I think a "note" in the IPLog section would suffice. Perhaps in the CQ, as well, especially if we are expecting a fixed release "in about a week",
which was how I read the commons.net bug response.

I would prefer to never submit our own "patched versions" from Orbit. Especially in a case like this, where the hosting project is "still alive" and responsive.

I suggest to continue to work with original project, see if they could do a quick maintenance release. If quick enough (and if IP staff could accommodate)
it would be an acceptable reason to postpone our "final R build" for a week. If it can not be done in time for our Kepler release, we would do a
quick, "off schedule" maintenance release, say in about a month? So you or others could at least provide the fixed version from your update sites
for adopters/users who needed the fixed version.

Thanks for keeping us well informed.






From:        "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Orbit Developer discussion <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        05/15/2013 06:22 AM
Subject:        Re: [orbit-dev] Added commons.net 3.2.0 to Orbit
Sent by:        orbit-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Hi Orbiteers,
 
When testing the new commons net 3.2 , I found a regression in the library’s FTP support:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=408092
 
We can work around this regression in our code, since we’re calling the affected method only in one place (FTPClient#printWorkingDirectory()). In fact adding this workaround would be my preference for the TM/RSE
Project, since we haven’t updated Commons Net since the 2.2 release (Nov 22, 2010) and there are other
bug fixes related to IPv6 that we should adopt.
 
But I’m wondering whether we even want a library with a severe known regression in Orbit … and if we do, what’s the best way warning other potential adopters, such that they don’t run into the same problem when they pull Commons Net 3.2 from Orbit ?
 
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect – Development Tools, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
 
From: orbit-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:orbit-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:23 PM
To: orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [orbit-dev] Added commons.net 3.2.0 to Orbit
 
Hi Orbiteers,
 
I know it’s late with RC2 coming up, but I’ve just had to add Apache Commons Net 3.2.0 to Orbit as per this CQ:
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7043
 
I think I’ve done things right – after all it’s a simple version update from the previous Commons Net 3.1.0 .
The build had been failing before my additions – let me know if anything seems to be missing (do we need a bugzilla for adding to Orbit ?)
 
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect – Development Tools, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
 _______________________________________________
orbit-dev mailing list
orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev