I read through all the commits mentioned in the bugs that block bug 59836.
These changes, excluding ClientAnchor.getAnchorType(), were made after the
release of POI 3.14, so I could safely revert back to the original getter
behavior. I have left ClientAnchor.getAnchorType() returning AnchorType
enum and am ***hoping for some discussion on this before we start RC3.***
The commits I made span for reverting the other getters span r1760607 to
r1760641. Some of these commits are just javadoc, @deprecated, @since,
@Deprecated, @Internal, and @Removal changes.
***Please add the following*** to the release notes per r1737751 bug 59264
comment 4:
CellStyle#BORDER_HAIR and #BORDER_DOTTED were swapped to correctly reflect
the official names and to be consistent with BorderStyle enum. HAIR has
smaller dots than DOTTED
On Sep 13, 2016 19:23, "Javen O'Neal" <javenon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> CellValue#getCellType was changed to return an enum after the 3.14
> release. I reverted that signature change in r1760607 (see bug 59791
> comment 13).
>
> For bug 59907, I broke backwards compatibility for ClientAnchor (both HSSF
> and XSSF) in r1716313 (first appeared in POI 3.14 beta 1 and included in
> POI 3.14 final) without the usual 2 release deprecation warning. The
> question is do I restore the behavior of 3.13 (breaking code a second time
> for anyone who upgraded their code to 3.14, and a third time whenever we
> retire the int code), or do we leave it as is and ask users to upgrade to
> the enum getter now?
>
> Looking at the code example from bug 59907 comment 1, the fix for them is
> simple: delete ".getValue()".
>
> On Sep 13, 2016 09:06, "Javen O'Neal" <javenon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I will commit a fix for this today with the goal for backwards
>> compatibility.
>>
>> Here's the plan:
>> getX() returns int
>> getXEnum() returns enum
>> setX(int)
>> setX(enum)
>>
>> I will also take a look at bug 59907 (client anchor enum)
>>
>> On Sep 13, 2016 6:58 AM, "David North" <dtn-...@corefiling.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Javen, any thoughts on this one?
>>>
>>> On 13/09/16 12:14, Dominik Stadler wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I really hate to delay this further, but unfortunately we have a
>>> similar
>>> > problem in class CellValue as we tried to fix in Cell in RC2, the
>>> > getCellType() is now an enum whereas it was an int before, so something
>>> > like the following in user-code does break in POI 3.15:
>>> >
>>> > CellValue cellValue = checkAndGetCellValue(evaluator, sheet, line);
>>> >
>>> > switch (cellValue.getCellType()) {
>>> > case Cell.CELL_TYPE_STRING:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I am sorry that I did not see this earlier but this can lead to the
>>> same
>>> > incompatibility as we had in Cell before.
>>> >
>>> > Dominik.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:46 PM, David North <dno...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi everyone,
>>> >>
>>> >> My apologies for going AWOL in the middle of the last release
>>> attempt. I
>>> >> didn't anticipate that we'd find problems in review twice in a row,
>>> and
>>> >> things have been very busy for me at work lately. However, I've now
>>> >> rolled a second RC for 3.15.
>>> >>
>>> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/poi/3.15-RC2/
>>> >>
>>> >> Areas to review:
>>> >>
>>> >> * Does it work?
>>> >> * Are the sigs and hashes valid?
>>> >> * Have the issues with the last RC been fixed?
>>> >> * Are the release notes now in good shape?
>>> >>
>>> >> The vote starts now and ends at 20:55 BST on Tuesday 13 September
>>> 2016.
>>> >>
>>> >> Here is my +1.
>>> >>
>>> >> After this release is done, I'll try and find some time to profile the
>>> >> build & tests - 15 minutes is quite a wait on an SSD (it's possible we
>>> >> might want some multi-threaded options on the tests).
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> David North | www.dnorth.net
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org
>>>
>>>
