[GitHub] commons-text issue #62: TEXT-101: Moved RandomStringUtils to Commons-text

[coveralls]

Github user coveralls commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/commons-text/pull/62
  

[![Coverage 
Status](https://coveralls.io/builds/13157503/badge)](https://coveralls.io/builds/13157503)

Coverage decreased (-0.03%) to 98.259% when pulling 
**00011e92477ca610a313c40ed749512e5443ffa2 on ameyjadiye:TEXT-101** into 
**30a29e2cf20e4c2036b423399a91cd01cd1759b6 on apache:master**.



---

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VFS] Logging levels

[Gary Gregory]

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Bruno P. Kinoshita <
brunodepau...@yahoo.com.br.invalid> wrote:

> I'm OK with this change.
>
> If it's something important, we can remove and just include a note in the
> release notes saying it is now logged under a different level.
>

I will create a JIRA for it...

Gary


>
>
> Cheers
> Bruno
>
> 
> From: Gary Gregory 
> To: Commons Developers List 
> Sent: Thursday, 7 September 2017 9:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [VFS] Logging levels
>
>
>
> There is only ONE message logged at the INFO level, it's still annoying.
> IMO.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Gary Gregory 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > IMO, due to the low-level nature of Commons VFS, I think it not log at
> the
> > INFO level. Every chatty log events should be at the DEBUG or TRACE
> level.
> >
> > I'd like to change all INFO messages to DEBUG or TRACE (depending on the
> > message)
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Gary
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VFS] Logging levels

[Bruno P. Kinoshita]

I'm OK with this change.

If it's something important, we can remove and just include a note in the 
release notes saying it is now logged under a different level.


Cheers
Bruno


From: Gary Gregory 
To: Commons Developers List  
Sent: Thursday, 7 September 2017 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [VFS] Logging levels



There is only ONE message logged at the INFO level, it's still annoying.
IMO.

Gary


On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Gary Gregory  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> IMO, due to the low-level nature of Commons VFS, I think it not log at the
> INFO level. Every chatty log events should be at the DEBUG or TRACE level.
>
> I'd like to change all INFO messages to DEBUG or TRACE (depending on the
> message)
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VFS] Logging levels

[Gary Gregory]

There is only ONE message logged at the INFO level, it's still annoying.
IMO.

Gary

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Gary Gregory  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> IMO, due to the low-level nature of Commons VFS, I think it not log at the
> INFO level. Every chatty log events should be at the DEBUG or TRACE level.
>
> I'd like to change all INFO messages to DEBUG or TRACE (depending on the
> message)
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>

[VFS] Logging levels

[Gary Gregory]

Hi All,

IMO, due to the low-level nature of Commons VFS, I think it not log at the
INFO level. Every chatty log events should be at the DEBUG or TRACE level.

I'd like to change all INFO messages to DEBUG or TRACE (depending on the
message)

Thoughts?

Gary

[GitHub] commons-text pull request #62: TEXT-101: Moved RandomStringUtils to Commons-...

[ameyjadiye]

GitHub user ameyjadiye opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/commons-text/pull/62

TEXT-101: Moved RandomStringUtils to Commons-text 

Moved **RandomStringUtils** from lang to text along with changed core logic 
which is using **RandomStringGenerator** internally, Test cases are copied from 
commons-lang for making sure its working as it's working in commons-lang.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/ameyjadiye/commons-text TEXT-101

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/commons-text/pull/62.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #62


commit aebacbabaa3debae909081cbd55475f6f108d141
Author: Amey Jadiye 
Date:   2017-09-06T20:40:11Z

copied RandomStringGenerator required code from master

commit e45738f00417ac0dcae1784c7904dc6fc156ae32
Author: Amey Jadiye 
Date:   2017-09-06T20:41:51Z

TEXT-101 : Moved RandomStringUtils from lang to text with improved core 
logic

commit 00011e92477ca610a313c40ed749512e5443ffa2
Author: Amey Jadiye 
Date:   2017-09-06T20:43:33Z

added Amey's email id




---

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-jelly-1.0.1 based on RC4

[Gary Gregory]

On Sep 6, 2017 13:13, "Rob Tompkins"  wrote:



> On Sep 6, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Oliver Heger 
wrote:
>
> Hello Rob,
>
> thank you for preparing another RC.
>
> I still have a 1.5 JDK and ant installed and was able to build the
> source distribution successfully (on Windows 10). I have the impression
> that the 'test' target does not actually execute tests, but this is
> probably not a problem.
>
> I noticed the following things:
> * The distributions do not have a root directory under which they
> deflate; all content is on top level. Other components use specific root
> folders for src and bin.
> * The source distribution contains a README-binary-dist.txt file, but
> this file is not contained in the binary distribution (where it probably
> belongs). The file is outdated anyway, it still references
> jakarta.apache.org.
> * The README.txt in the source distribution is probably outdated, too.
> It talks about Maven 1 as build tool and uses an old Apache header.
> * The NOTICE file does not contain a copyright date.
> * Artifacts have very limited manifests, for instance no OSGi meta
> information is present.
> * The pom.xml does not work, it produces a JAR with only a manifest.
>
> I think, most of these points are not blocking. For just getting out a
> bugfix release, it is not necessary to fix them. About the NOTICE file I
> am not sure, however. I assume that a valid copyright date is required.

If that is indeed the case then I'll go for an RC5 with the above changes.
Anyone else here thoughts before I give another try?

Do pardon my repeated attempts here, sorting out this older component is
more challenging than the standard component release mechanics.


It's all good. I went up to RC7 on a Codec release once...

Gary


Thanks for the eyes,
-Rob

>
> Oliver
>
>> Am 06.09.2017 um 13:44 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Commons Jelly 1.0.1 RC4 is available for review here:
>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/jelly (svn revision
21487)
>>
>> The tag is here (tag commit 1807466):
>>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jelly/tags/
commons-jelly-1.0.1-RC4
>>
>> Commit the tag points at:
>>  1807463
>>
>> Maven Artifacts:
>>  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1262
>>
>> These are the Maven artifacts and their hashes:
>>
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 40030f76f83f0150fce9e6e5df1e3b7e0498538e)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 6181719280762509243dba779437e2b998690181)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 0e67c74835c6f668d9c9ea6a91484f7d27510be8)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom
>> 
>> (SHA1: 65333d0abdce02b3ae3a54c513c19b7aa04749ba)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: ea9a7b0c06996515505427147f0e62a487394d06)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 3dc6dfec6dc755de6500822baa337b742f1402cc)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 67fb8d04b8cb2357f3789d5623b54cabe4f302d1)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 40645d9c20af4d072d570d49f6087acb8427d9a3)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: c9a2f4c4fd0c03ad85adaf4d68fef1f206f64e33)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-
test-sources.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: a5e450a33091dcdf080e359aeeb958aeede743cb)
>> /

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Gary Gregory]

On Sep 6, 2017 12:31, "Pascal Schumacher"  wrote:

I'm for keeping RandomStringUtils in lang (at least in 3.x).


It has to stay in 3.x no matter what to maintain BC.

Gary



Am 06.09.2017 um 12:55 schrieb Rob Tompkins:

> On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
>> for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
>>
>> RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it quickly.
>> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
>> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
>> using
>> RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should release
>> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,
>> WDYT
>> ?
>>
>> I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew “line
> between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality should go in
> [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably want it, whereas text
> is geared towards folks actually doing text manipulation [1].
>
> Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
> folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here. That
> said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.
>
> Cheers,
> -Rob
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto
>
> Regards,
>> Amey
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:

 Hello Benedikt,

 How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?

>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original intent
>>> was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
>>> backwards?
>>>
>>> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
>>> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
>>> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
>>> reasonable to me.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> I will
 submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of failing
 test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 just to remove
 deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang - 3.7 I'm fine
 with that as well.

 [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101

 On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter 

>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,
>
> since we’re getting more and more requests about the deprecation of
> RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current state of
> the
> master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC sometime this
>
 week.
>>>
 So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so now.
>
> Regards,
> Benedikt
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
>
 --

 -

 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org

 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-jelly-1.0.1 based on RC4

[Rob Tompkins]

> On Sep 6, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Oliver Heger  wrote:
> 
> Hello Rob,
> 
> thank you for preparing another RC.
> 
> I still have a 1.5 JDK and ant installed and was able to build the
> source distribution successfully (on Windows 10). I have the impression
> that the 'test' target does not actually execute tests, but this is
> probably not a problem.
> 
> I noticed the following things:
> * The distributions do not have a root directory under which they
> deflate; all content is on top level. Other components use specific root
> folders for src and bin.
> * The source distribution contains a README-binary-dist.txt file, but
> this file is not contained in the binary distribution (where it probably
> belongs). The file is outdated anyway, it still references
> jakarta.apache.org.
> * The README.txt in the source distribution is probably outdated, too.
> It talks about Maven 1 as build tool and uses an old Apache header.
> * The NOTICE file does not contain a copyright date.
> * Artifacts have very limited manifests, for instance no OSGi meta
> information is present.
> * The pom.xml does not work, it produces a JAR with only a manifest.
> 
> I think, most of these points are not blocking. For just getting out a
> bugfix release, it is not necessary to fix them. About the NOTICE file I
> am not sure, however. I assume that a valid copyright date is required.

If that is indeed the case then I'll go for an RC5 with the above changes. 
Anyone else here thoughts before I give another try? 

Do pardon my repeated attempts here, sorting out this older component is more 
challenging than the standard component release mechanics. 

Thanks for the eyes,
-Rob

> 
> Oliver
> 
>> Am 06.09.2017 um 13:44 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Commons Jelly 1.0.1 RC4 is available for review here:
>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/jelly (svn revision 21487)
>> 
>> The tag is here (tag commit 1807466):
>>  
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jelly/tags/commons-jelly-1.0.1-RC4
>> 
>> Commit the tag points at:
>>  1807463
>> 
>> Maven Artifacts:
>>  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1262
>> 
>> These are the Maven artifacts and their hashes:
>> 
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 40030f76f83f0150fce9e6e5df1e3b7e0498538e)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 6181719280762509243dba779437e2b998690181)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 0e67c74835c6f668d9c9ea6a91484f7d27510be8)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom
>> 
>> (SHA1: 65333d0abdce02b3ae3a54c513c19b7aa04749ba)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: ea9a7b0c06996515505427147f0e62a487394d06)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: 3dc6dfec6dc755de6500822baa337b742f1402cc)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 67fb8d04b8cb2357f3789d5623b54cabe4f302d1)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar
>> 
>> (SHA1: 40645d9c20af4d072d570d49f6087acb8427d9a3)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: c9a2f4c4fd0c03ad85adaf4d68fef1f206f64e33)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar.asc
>> 
>> (SHA1: a5e450a33091dcdf080e359aeeb958aeede743cb)
>> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar
>> 

Re: [JCS] missing 2.2 release in jira?

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Ok so sounds a 2.3 from master for next release is ok, or are you bound
somehow to 2.2 ans prefer some backports?

Le 6 sept. 2017 20:07, "Thomas Vandahl"  a écrit :

> Hi Romain,
>
> On 05.09.17 20:32, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > @Thomas: can you say a word on the diff between 2.3 and 2.2 if you have
> it
> > still in memory please?
>
> 1. The CacheEventQueue has been derived from PooledCacheEventQueue and
> most of its methods removed. The previous implementation smelled.
> 2. The memory caches have been modified massively. They provide less
> duplicate code, better locking mechanisms etc
> 3. The ThreadPoolManager now returns ExecutorService instead of
> ThreadPoolExecutor which allows to use ForkJoinPools once we go to
> Java8. All occurrences in the code have been changed accordingly.
>
> That's basically what I remember. All other changes have been backported
> to trunk.
>
> Bye, Thomas
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Pascal Schumacher]

I'm for keeping RandomStringUtils in lang (at least in 3.x).

Am 06.09.2017 um 12:55 schrieb Rob Tompkins:

On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:

Hi Rob,

Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.

RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it quickly.
Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
using
RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should release
text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,  WDYT
?


I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew “line 
between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality should go in [lang] 
if the arbitrary java developer would probably want it, whereas text is geared 
towards folks actually doing text manipulation [1].

Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other folks’ 
thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here. That said, I’m 
perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.

Cheers,
-Rob

[1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto


Regards,
Amey

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:


On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:

Hello Benedikt,

How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?

[snip]

I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original intent
was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
backwards?

But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
reasonable to me.

Thoughts?

-Rob


I will
submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of failing
test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 just to remove
deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang - 3.7 I'm fine
with that as well.

[1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter 

wrote:

Hi,

since we’re getting more and more requests about the deprecation of
RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current state of the
master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC sometime this

week.

So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so now.

Regards,
Benedikt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org




--

-

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [JCS] missing 2.2 release in jira?

[Thomas Vandahl]

Hi Romain,

On 05.09.17 20:32, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> @Thomas: can you say a word on the diff between 2.3 and 2.2 if you have it
> still in memory please?

1. The CacheEventQueue has been derived from PooledCacheEventQueue and
most of its methods removed. The previous implementation smelled.
2. The memory caches have been modified massively. They provide less
duplicate code, better locking mechanisms etc
3. The ThreadPoolManager now returns ExecutorService instead of
ThreadPoolExecutor which allows to use ForkJoinPools once we go to
Java8. All occurrences in the code have been changed accordingly.

That's basically what I remember. All other changes have been backported
to trunk.

Bye, Thomas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-jelly-1.0.1 based on RC4

[Oliver Heger]

Hello Rob,

thank you for preparing another RC.

I still have a 1.5 JDK and ant installed and was able to build the
source distribution successfully (on Windows 10). I have the impression
that the 'test' target does not actually execute tests, but this is
probably not a problem.

I noticed the following things:
* The distributions do not have a root directory under which they
deflate; all content is on top level. Other components use specific root
folders for src and bin.
* The source distribution contains a README-binary-dist.txt file, but
this file is not contained in the binary distribution (where it probably
belongs). The file is outdated anyway, it still references
jakarta.apache.org.
* The README.txt in the source distribution is probably outdated, too.
It talks about Maven 1 as build tool and uses an old Apache header.
* The NOTICE file does not contain a copyright date.
* Artifacts have very limited manifests, for instance no OSGi meta
information is present.
* The pom.xml does not work, it produces a JAR with only a manifest.

I think, most of these points are not blocking. For just getting out a
bugfix release, it is not necessary to fix them. About the NOTICE file I
am not sure, however. I assume that a valid copyright date is required.

Oliver

Am 06.09.2017 um 13:44 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
> Hello,
> 
> Commons Jelly 1.0.1 RC4 is available for review here:
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/jelly (svn revision 21487)
> 
> The tag is here (tag commit 1807466):
>   
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jelly/tags/commons-jelly-1.0.1-RC4
> 
> Commit the tag points at:
>   1807463
> 
> Maven Artifacts:
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1262
> 
> These are the Maven artifacts and their hashes:
> 
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar
> 
> (SHA1: 40030f76f83f0150fce9e6e5df1e3b7e0498538e)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar.asc
> 
> (SHA1: 6181719280762509243dba779437e2b998690181)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom.asc
> 
> (SHA1: 0e67c74835c6f668d9c9ea6a91484f7d27510be8)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom
> 
> (SHA1: 65333d0abdce02b3ae3a54c513c19b7aa04749ba)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar.asc
> 
> (SHA1: ea9a7b0c06996515505427147f0e62a487394d06)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar.asc
> 
> (SHA1: 3dc6dfec6dc755de6500822baa337b742f1402cc)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar
> 
> (SHA1: 67fb8d04b8cb2357f3789d5623b54cabe4f302d1)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar
> 
> (SHA1: 40645d9c20af4d072d570d49f6087acb8427d9a3)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar.asc
> 
> (SHA1: c9a2f4c4fd0c03ad85adaf4d68fef1f206f64e33)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar.asc
> 
> (SHA1: a5e450a33091dcdf080e359aeeb958aeede743cb)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar
> 
> (SHA1: c4a6e671797be00657016bb39eb5fbe2860066ac)
> /commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar
> 
> (SHA1: 687032952d79c56bc666ef01d95fb294a4c7c383)
> 
> I have tested this with JDK 1.5.0_22-b03 us

Re: [VFS] toward releasing 2.2

[Gary Gregory]

Great thank you. I just found out we have a bug at work that might only
affect 2.2-SNAPSHOT, so I have to take a look at that first anyway.

Gary

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Bruno P. Kinoshita <
brunodepau...@yahoo.com.br.invalid> wrote:

> Going to Australia in a couple of weeks, so if I volunteered now I could
> be unable to proceed with the release if the first RC failed.
>
>
> Should no one volunteers, and if you haven't already cut the release, I'd
> be glad to try releasing a SVN + multi-module project in mid-October, and
> at the same time review - and learn with - our release process.
> Cheers
> Bruno
>
>
>
> 
> From: Gary Gregory 
> To: Commons Developers List 
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 September 2017 5:39 AM
> Subject: [VFS] toward releasing 2.2
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
> I would live to see a release for VFS so I can pickup some bug fixes.
>
>
> If any one wants to RM, great, otherwise I will have to put that on my
>
> TO-DO list.
>
>
> If you want to perform changes, now is the time. The sooner the better.
>
>
> Gary
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: AW: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Gary Gregory]

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Jan Matèrne (jhm)  wrote:

> > > Using RandomStringGenerator from RandomStringUtils sounds good, but
> > > implies adding a dependency to commons-lang (commons-text).
> >
> > I haven't understood it that way; IIRC it was suggested that "Commons
> > Text" would additionally provide the same easy-to-use API (alias
> > "RandomStringUtils") as is currently in "Commons Lang".
> > When available, "RandomStringUtils" will be deleted from the latter,
> > and users will have to modify their "import" statement.
>
> Ok, that would be fine
> * RandomStringGenerator in commons-text
> * new RandomStringUtils in commons-text with different package using
> RandomStringGenerator
> * mark RandomStringUtils in commons-lang as deprecated
> * release commons-text
> * release commons-lang
> * later remove RSU from commons-lang
>

As in 4.0.

Gary


>
>
> Jan
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

AW: AW: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[jhm]

> > Using RandomStringGenerator from RandomStringUtils sounds good, but
> > implies adding a dependency to commons-lang (commons-text).
> 
> I haven't understood it that way; IIRC it was suggested that "Commons
> Text" would additionally provide the same easy-to-use API (alias
> "RandomStringUtils") as is currently in "Commons Lang".
> When available, "RandomStringUtils" will be deleted from the latter,
> and users will have to modify their "import" statement.

Ok, that would be fine
* RandomStringGenerator in commons-text
* new RandomStringUtils in commons-text with different package using 
RandomStringGenerator
* mark RandomStringUtils in commons-lang as deprecated
* release commons-text
* release commons-lang
* later remove RSU from commons-lang


Jan


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

[VOTE] Release commons-jelly-1.0.1 based on RC4

[Rob Tompkins]

Hello,

Commons Jelly 1.0.1 RC4 is available for review here:
  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/jelly (svn revision 21487)

The tag is here (tag commit 1807466):
  
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jelly/tags/commons-jelly-1.0.1-RC4

Commit the tag points at:
  1807463

Maven Artifacts:
  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1262

These are the Maven artifacts and their hashes:

/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar

(SHA1: 40030f76f83f0150fce9e6e5df1e3b7e0498538e)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar.asc

(SHA1: 6181719280762509243dba779437e2b998690181)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom.asc

(SHA1: 0e67c74835c6f668d9c9ea6a91484f7d27510be8)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.pom

(SHA1: 65333d0abdce02b3ae3a54c513c19b7aa04749ba)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar.asc

(SHA1: ea9a7b0c06996515505427147f0e62a487394d06)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-javadoc.jar.asc

(SHA1: 3dc6dfec6dc755de6500822baa337b742f1402cc)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-sources.jar

(SHA1: 67fb8d04b8cb2357f3789d5623b54cabe4f302d1)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1.jar

(SHA1: 40645d9c20af4d072d570d49f6087acb8427d9a3)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar.asc

(SHA1: c9a2f4c4fd0c03ad85adaf4d68fef1f206f64e33)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar.asc

(SHA1: a5e450a33091dcdf080e359aeeb958aeede743cb)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-test-sources.jar

(SHA1: c4a6e671797be00657016bb39eb5fbe2860066ac)
/commons-jelly/commons-jelly/1.0.1/commons-jelly-1.0.1-tests.jar

(SHA1: 687032952d79c56bc666ef01d95fb294a4c7c383)

I have tested this with JDK 1.5.0_22-b03 using Ant 1.6.0. Notes on building can 
be found in the 
BUILDING.md, included in the source distributions. And, the only changes 
between release candidates are documentation and build script changes.

Details of changes since 1.0 are in the release notes:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/jelly/RELEASE-NOTES.txt

Site:
  I have no site as this was generated with ant. My plan was to simply make 
minimal 
  changes to the existant site for the purpose of documenting the patch.

KEYS:
  https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS

Please review the release candidate and vote.
This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now,
i.e. sometime after 12:00 (UTC) 9-September 2017

  [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
  [ ] +0 OK, but...
  [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
  [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...

Thanks!
Rob
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: AW: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Gilles]

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 13:15:33 +0200, Jan Matèrne wrote:

Using RandomStringGenerator from RandomStringUtils sounds good, but
implies adding
a dependency to commons-lang (commons-text).


I haven't understood it that way; IIRC it was suggested that
"Commons Text" would additionally provide the same easy-to-use
API (alias "RandomStringUtils") as is currently in "Commons
Lang".
When available, "RandomStringUtils" will be deleted from the
latter, and users will have to modify their "import" statement.

Regards,
Gilles


At the moment the only dependencies are for testing [1].

I am more of a -0 about adding the dependency, because this implies
that all projects using commons-lang have to deliver commons-text 
too.

Optional dependencies seem to be a solution, but [2] shows that these
dependencies should be avoided if possible.

Jan

[1] https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/blob/master/pom.xml
[2]

https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-optional-and-excludes-dependencies.html




-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Amey Jadiye [mailto:ameyjad...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. September 2017 09:34
An: Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

Hi Rob,

Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming for
RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.

 RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it
quickly.
Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm 
not
only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic 
with

using RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we
should release
text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 
3.6.1,

WDYT ?

Regards,
Amey

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  
wrote:


>
> > On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye 
wrote:
> >
> > Hello Benedikt,
> >
> > How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
> [snip]
>
> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original
> intent was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as
> opposed to backwards?
>
> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that
most
> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think
that
> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction
seems
> reasonable to me.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Rob
>
> > I will
> > submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of
> > failing test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 
just

to
> > remove deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang 
-

> > 3.7 I'm fine with that as well.
> >
> > [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter
> > 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> since we’re getting more and more requests about the 
deprecation

of
> >> RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current 
state

> >> of the master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC
> >> sometime this
> week.
> >> So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so 
now.

> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Benedikt
> >> 
--

-
> >> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > 
---

-
> > -
> >
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
> 
-

> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

AW: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[jhm]

Using RandomStringGenerator from RandomStringUtils sounds good, but implies 
adding 
a dependency to commons-lang (commons-text).
At the moment the only dependencies are for testing [1].

I am more of a -0 about adding the dependency, because this implies that all 
projects using commons-lang have to deliver commons-text too.
Optional dependencies seem to be a solution, but [2] shows that these 
dependencies should be avoided if possible.

Jan

[1] https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/blob/master/pom.xml
[2] 
https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-optional-and-excludes-dependencies.html



> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Amey Jadiye [mailto:ameyjad...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. September 2017 09:34
> An: Commons Developers List
> Betreff: Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming for
> RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
> 
>  RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it
> quickly.
> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
> using RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we
> should release
> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,
> WDYT ?
> 
> Regards,
> Amey
> 
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
> 
> >
> > > On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Benedikt,
> > >
> > > How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
> > [snip]
> >
> > I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original
> > intent was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as
> > opposed to backwards?
> >
> > But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that
> most
> > folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think
> that
> > question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction
> seems
> > reasonable to me.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > I will
> > > submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of
> > > failing test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 just
> to
> > > remove deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang -
> > > 3.7 I'm fine with that as well.
> > >
> > > [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter
> > > 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> since we’re getting more and more requests about the deprecation
> of
> > >> RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current state
> > >> of the master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC
> > >> sometime this
> > week.
> > >> So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so now.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Benedikt
> > >> --
> -
> > >> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > ---
> -
> > > -
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >
> >


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Rob Tompkins]

> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Gilles  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:55:49 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Rob,
>>> 
>>> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
>>> for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
>>> 
>>> RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it quickly.
>>> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
>>> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
>>> using
>>> RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should release
>>> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,  WDYT
>>> ?
>>> 
>> 
>> I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew
>> “line between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality
>> should go in [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably
>> want it, whereas text is geared towards folks actually doing text
>> manipulation [1].
>> 
>> Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
>> folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here.
>> That said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.
> 
> "Grey area" should favour small components.

Fair point. I take that to mean that you think that it should either go into 
text to make lang smaller or its own component. 

I suppose because the generator lives in [text] that makes a good argument for 
[text].

More thoughts out there?

-Rob 

> 
> Gilles
> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -Rob
>> 
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Amey
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
>>> 
 
> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> 
> Hello Benedikt,
> 
> How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
 [snip]
 
 I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original intent
 was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
 backwards?
 
 But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
 folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
 question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
 reasonable to me.
 
 Thoughts?
 
 -Rob
 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Gilles]

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:55:49 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  
wrote:


Hi Rob,

Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.

RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it 
quickly.
Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm 
not
only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic 
with

using
RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should 
release
text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 
3.6.1,  WDYT

?



I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew
“line between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality
should go in [lang] if the arbitrary java developer would probably
want it, whereas text is geared towards folks actually doing text
manipulation [1].

Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other
folks’ thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area 
here.

That said, I’m perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.


"Grey area" should favour small components.

Gilles



Cheers,
-Rob

[1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto


Regards,
Amey

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  
wrote:




On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  
wrote:


Hello Benedikt,

How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?

[snip]

I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original 
intent
was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed 
to

backwards?

But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that 
most
folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think 
that
question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction 
seems

reasonable to me.

Thoughts?

-Rob




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Rob Tompkins]

> On Sep 6, 2017, at 3:34 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
> for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.
> 
> RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it quickly.
> Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
> only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
> using
> RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should release
> text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,  WDYT
> ?
> 

I definitely lean this direction, but if I recall correctly we drew “line 
between [lang] and [text]” to be: a piece of functionality should go in [lang] 
if the arbitrary java developer would probably want it, whereas text is geared 
towards folks actually doing text manipulation [1].

Personally I’m a +0 to +1 on doing this, but I wanted to gauge other folks’ 
thoughts here because I feel like we’re in that grey area here. That said, I’m 
perfectly willing to roll a 1.2 [text] release.

Cheers,
-Rob

[1] http://markmail.org/message/a2urysnxvxihfoto

> Regards,
> Amey
> 
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:
> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Benedikt,
>>> 
>>> How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
>> [snip]
>> 
>> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original intent
>> was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
>> backwards?
>> 
>> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
>> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
>> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
>> reasonable to me.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> I will
>>> submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of failing
>>> test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 just to remove
>>> deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang - 3.7 I'm fine
>>> with that as well.
>>> 
>>> [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi,
 
 since we’re getting more and more requests about the deprecation of
 RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current state of the
 master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC sometime this
>> week.
 So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so now.
 
 Regards,
 Benedikt
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>> 
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>> 
>> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [LANG] Releasing 3.6.1

[Amey Jadiye]

Hi Rob,

Looking at frequency I think more number of requests coming
for RandomStringUtils for its simplicity.

 RandomStringGenerator is strong , flexible but one can't use it quickly.
Also I think this tool should belong in Commons text's arsenal. I'm not
only moving RandomStringUtils  to text but changing its core logic with
using
RandomStringGenerator which seems fair to me. So finally we should release
text-1.2 rather doing rollback of deprecation and release lang 3.6.1,  WDYT
?

Regards,
Amey

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, 12:00 AM Rob Tompkins  wrote:

>
> > On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Amey Jadiye  wrote:
> >
> > Hello Benedikt,
> >
> > How about we keep that deprecated in lang and release Text-1.2 ?
> [snip]
>
> I’m on board with this if folks are complaining and the original intent
> was to deprecate things in [lang]. Why not roll forward as opposed to
> backwards?
>
> But, that opens the question: Is RandomStringUtils something that most
> folks would want (i.e. should it be in [lang] or [text])? I think that
> question is more the heart of the problem here. Either direction seems
> reasonable to me.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Rob
>
> > I will
> > submit changes [1] related to this in fact i'm fixing couple of failing
> > test cases ATM. If you are planning to release 3.6.1 just to remove
> > deprecation and  deprecate RandomStringUtils back in Lang - 3.7 I'm fine
> > with that as well.
> >
> > [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEXT-101
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Benedikt Ritter 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> since we’re getting more and more requests about the deprecation of
> >> RandomStringUtils, I’m thinking about releasing the current state of the
> >> master branch as 3.6.1. I may have time to push an RC sometime this
> week.
> >> So if you have some fixes you want to include, please do so now.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Benedikt
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > -
> >
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VFS] toward releasing 2.2

[Bruno P. Kinoshita]

Going to Australia in a couple of weeks, so if I volunteered now I could be 
unable to proceed with the release if the first RC failed.


Should no one volunteers, and if you haven't already cut the release, I'd be 
glad to try releasing a SVN + multi-module project in mid-October, and at the 
same time review - and learn with - our release process.
Cheers
Bruno




From: Gary Gregory 
To: Commons Developers List  
Sent: Tuesday, 5 September 2017 5:39 AM
Subject: [VFS] toward releasing 2.2



Hi All,


I would live to see a release for VFS so I can pickup some bug fixes.


If any one wants to RM, great, otherwise I will have to put that on my

TO-DO list.


If you want to perform changes, now is the time. The sooner the better.


Gary

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org