Thank you.
Gili
On 25/03/2014 11:36 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> Didn't know that - I have just reopened those pull requests.
>
> Marek
>
> On 25 Mar 2014, at 15:57, cowwoc <cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org
> <mailto:cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> When one files a pull request, Github automatically creates a new
>> Github issue for it.
>>
>> I guess this means you'll have to manually reopen the two
>> pull-requests you closed (the top two entries in
>> https://github.com/jersey/jersey-1.x/pulls?direction=desc&page=1&sort=created&state=closed)
>>
>> Gili
>>
>> On 25/03/2014 10:03 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> I have not closed anything explicitly. The only explanation I have
>>> is that your pull request may have been automatically closed by
>>> github infrastructure when I deleted the Jersey 1.x github issue
>>> tracker (since we have been tracking issues on java.net
>>> <http://java.net/> Jira and I have noticed that somehow the
>>> repository <https://github.com/jersey/jersey-1.x/> was misconfigured
>>> to support issue tracking). Is that the case? Did you somehow bind
>>> the pull request to a github issue?
>>>
>>> Marek
>>>
>>> On 24 Mar 2014, at 18:47, cowwoc <cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org
>>> <mailto:cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Marek,
>>>>
>>>> On the one hand you expect the community to contribute "any new
>>>> features or minor improvements & annoyance fixes in 1.x code base".
>>>> On the other hand when I tried to do precisely that
>>>> (https://github.com/jersey/jersey-1.x/pull/5) I waited 3 weeks for
>>>> a reply, and then you closed the pull request without merging the
>>>> changes or leaving a comment.
>>>>
>>>> How is the community supposed to work under these conditions?
>>>>
>>>> Gili
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17/03/2014 10:25 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>>>> Hi Gili,
>>>>>
>>>>> As the closing comment suggests ("Minor issue, will not fix in the
>>>>> sustained code."), this is a minor issue in our view. As such we
>>>>> are not going to fix it in Jersey 1.x as this code has been moved
>>>>> to sustaining mode and we do not have cycles to fix such minor
>>>>> issues in a sustained code base. We will still be delivering fixes
>>>>> for critical bugs discovered in 1.x code base. However any new
>>>>> features or minor improvements & annoyance fixes in 1.x code base
>>>>> are left for community contribution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Feel free to open feature requests against Jersey 2.x for any
>>>>> features you are missing there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Marek
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06 Mar 2014, at 05:42, cowwoc <cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org
>>>>> <mailto:cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://java.net/jira/browse/JERSEY-1952
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was my understanding that you wouldn't close legitimate Jersey
>>>>>> 1.x bugs just because Jersey 2.x exists? Jersey 2.x is actually
>>>>>> worse in this regard (unit tests are even less flexible than in 1.x).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please reopen this issue until Jersey 2.x gains feature parity
>>>>>> with 1.x and majority community support. Most of us still need
>>>>>> Jersey 1.x support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>> Gili
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>