Just to update:
PR 13's comments appear to be about holes in the test coverage, and not the
solution. I'll look into emulating the test scenario the original authors
Of the recently reported bugs/issues, FCREPO-1194 and 1196 are confirmed.
1196 is fixed in an issue branch from the 3.6.2 release, and needs to be
ported to master. 1194 should be a trivial fix to have the RebuildServer
impl ignore the ManagementDelegate module during rebuilds. 1195 depends on
code in the fcrepo-misc module of the FCSU tool, and doesn't impact release
of the FCRepo artifacts.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Benjamin Armintor <armintor@...:
> I'm corresponding with the authors of an outstanding pull request about
> evaluating an alternative version of their changes, but I still expect to
> tag a release candidate by the end of the month. You can follow that
> discussion over at https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo/pull/13
> I was concerned that https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/FCREPO-1195 would
> hold the release up, but that's an issue that has to be fixed in the
> storage utility downstream. I'm still trying to evaluate FCREPO-1194 and
> FCREPO-1196, and would welcome help from anyone who can spare some time to
> look at those issues.
> - Ben (the 3.7 Release Manager)
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Edwin Shin <eddie@...:
>> We were aiming for an end-of-July release date, but, per usual, that
>> depends on the availability of the committers. Ben's our release manager
>> for 3.7 so he has the final word.
>> On Jul 19, 2013, at 9:42 PM, Jim Coble <jim.coble@...> wrote:
>> > Adam--
>> > I didn't realize there was going to be a Fedora 3.7. Is there an ETA
>> for its release?
>> > --Jim
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ajs6f@... [mailto:ajs6f@...]
>> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:06 AM
>> > To: Support and info exchange list for Fedora users.
>> > Subject: Re: [fcrepo-user] Fedora 3.6.2 and Java 7?
>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> > Hash: SHA1
>> > I can't say I've tried myself, but I believe there are some
>> incompatibilities in libraries supporting JMS messaging, and possibly
>> elsewhere. The next version we release (3.7) _is_ JDK7 ready.
>> > It may be possible to remove the offending libraries manually from the
>> 3.6.2 webapp, if this is a pressing requirement, and obviously if you don't
>> need the functionality they support.
>> > - ---
>> > A. Soroka
>> > The University of Virginia Library
>> > On Jul 19, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Jim Coble wrote:
>> >> I know that the Fedora installation documentation for 3.6 specifies
>> that JDK 6 is required but I was just double-checking to see if anyone
>> knows whether, in fact, Fedora 3.6.2 will work with (Sun/Oracle) JDK 7.
>> I’m asking because another web app that we want to run on the same server
>> requires Java 7.
>> >> Thanks.
>> >> --Jim
>> >> Jim Coble
>> >> Information Technology Services
>> >> Perkins Library, Duke University
>> >> Box 90196, Durham, NC 27708
>> >> 919-660-5974 (voice); 919-668-2578 (fax) Jim.coble@...
>> See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics
>> Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics
>> Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds.
>> Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today!
>> Fedora-commons-users mailing list