Re: [commons] New commiter Mark R. Diggory

On Wed, 28 May 2003 04:58 am, Juozas Baliuka wrote: > Sorry, > I proposed the vote. Do I need to send vote results to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? > Juozas, Normally, when a vote is complete, you would send an account request to [EMAIL PROTECTED], copied to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The account request should s

Re: [math] ACM license

On Tue, 27 May 2003, Mark R. Diggory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires >>a fee and/or specific permission. >> > Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". Yep, but it would also say that to people republishing the Apache code that republishes or copies

cvs commit: jakarta-commons/validator/src/share/org/apache/commons/validator Validator.java

dgraham 2003/05/27 21:30:58 Modified:validator/src/share/org/apache/commons/validator Validator.java Log: Changed parameters variable to Map instead of HashMap so we can change implementation later without breaking subclasses. Revision ChangesPath

cvs commit: jakarta-commons/validator/src/example/org/apache/commons/validator/example ValidateExample.java

dgraham 2003/05/27 21:28:01 Modified:validator/src/test/org/apache/commons/validator DoubleTest.java TestValidator.java LongTest.java LocaleTest.java RequiredIfTest.java EmailTest.java ValidatorTest.java MultipleTest

cvs commit: jakarta-commons/validator/src/share/org/apache/commons/validator ValidatorResources.java digester-rules.xml Field.java Form.java Constant.java FormSet.java

dgraham 2003/05/27 21:14:33 Modified:validator/src/share/org/apache/commons/validator ValidatorResources.java digester-rules.xml Field.java Form.java Constant.java FormSet.java Log: Deprecated Constant class as it is never really used.

RE: [math] Priority

> and unit tests. While things like rootfinding for > non-differentiable functions > may eventually have a place and may benefit from algorithms that > someone can > claim copyright ownership of, if no one else does it before I get > to it, I will > translate my simple newton's method implementati

RE: [PROPOSAL] HiveMind in the sandbox

I'm not an expert on Avalon, so this will be a learning experience for everyone involved :-) HiveMind is targetted at a layer below Avalon; you would use its concept of services and configurations to build a container like system, though it isn't a container per-se. The interceptor concept (wh

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20279] - [math] chi-squared distribution (part of the distribution collection)

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: [PROPOSAL] HiveMind in the sandbox

Can you elaborate on the differences between HiveMind and Avalon? After a first read, it seems like they both share similar aims...? Eric Pugh -Original Message- From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 8:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PROPO

[PROPOSAL] HiveMind in the sandbox

Proposal for HiveMind Package (0) rationale HiveMind is a simple, flexible framework for creating pluggable, configurable, reusable services. By pluggable, we mean that there is a complete separation of service definition and service implementation. By configurable we mean that modules may con

RE: validator & inheritance

Totally agree with the 'form' rename to 'bean' idea. Other good stuff too. I will post my ideas as soon as possible, before I write any code if I possible. Thanks -Original Message- From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 2:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] S

Re: [commons] New commiter Mark R. Diggory

On Tue, 27 May 2003 12:44 am, Mark R. Diggory wrote: > I know its only been a couple buisness days since this went out, what is > the usuall amount of time it takes to process a new commiter? Are there > any steps that I personally need to complete? > > thanks again, > Mark > Mark, IMHO, the norm

RE: Change of Group Owner for /home/cvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox

> From: Manoj Kasichainula [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 12:43 AM > On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 08:58:28AM -0700, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > Last week, the COMMONS-DEV mailing list voted to change our charter, such > > that the jakarta-commons-sandbox repository would be a

[Digester]Contribution

You can find attached a contribution to the Digester project. The CallFactoryMethodRule allows to: + make method call on object present in the digester stack + specify method name, parameter names and types to be used to make these calls + do some manipulation on the digester stack from the rule

Re: [math] Users Abilities vs. Developers was RE: [math] Very legitimate reasons to draw up Presicison Unit Tests.

--- Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hope, Matthew wrote: > >>-Original Message- > >>From: Phil Steitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: 27 May 2003 02:01 > >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > >>Subject: Re: [math] Very legitimate reasons to draw up > >>Presicison Unit Tests

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20267] - PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering out success results

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20267] New: - PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering out success results

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: [validator] PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering outsuccess results

Can do, though perhaps http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html#Patches should be updated to reflect that. Dave "David Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/27/2003 01:04 PM Please respond to "Jakarta Commons Developers List" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:

Re: [CLI] Latest news

I'd say the Option and Argument API is pretty stable, we'll do a review of this prior to a release to make sure. (The XXXBuilders will be as stable as the interfaces due to the tight coupling). The CommandLineParser may need some work, I don't think it will be too much though. The OptionGroup s

Re: [validator] PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering outsuccess results

Please create a bugzilla ticket for this and attach your patch to it. Otherwise, it will get lost in the email shuffle. Thanks, David Hi all (special shout out to Alex Chaffee!), Here's a patch we have applied to our local tree to allow filtering out success results (is there a use case for kno

Re: [math] ACM license

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires a fee and/or specific permission. Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". ACM is suggesting involvement and acknowledgment of their efforts in organizing and arc

Re: [validator] PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering outsuccess results

OK, let's try the inline approach; patch follows: Index: validator/src/example/org/apache/commons/validator/example/ValidateExample.java === RCS file: /home/cvspublic/jakarta-commons/validator/src/example/org/apache/commons/validato

Re: [math] Priority

Tim O'Brien wrote: On Tue, 2003-05-27 at 11:00, Mark R. Diggory wrote: Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". ACM is suggesting involvement and acknowledgment of their efforts in organizing and archiving these algorithms..Open Source Apache project and the legal bindings they wou

[validator] PATCH - add switch to Validator.java to allow filtering outsuccess results

Hi all (special shout out to Alex Chaffee!), Here's a patch we have applied to our local tree to allow filtering out success results (is there a use case for knowing that your input *did* pass validation rules that wouldn't be better handled by trace debugging? No new is good news...) AFAICT, it

[math] Priority

On Tue, 2003-05-27 at 11:00, Mark R. Diggory wrote: > Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". ACM is suggesting > involvement and acknowledgment of their efforts in organizing and > archiving these algorithms..Open Source > Apache project and the legal bindings they would want in such

Re: [math] ACM license

> "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires > >a fee and/or specific permission. > > > Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". ACM > is suggesting > involvement and acknowledgment of their efforts in > organizing and > archiving these a

RE: [CLI] Latest news

Good news on progress. How stable do you feel the pre-2.0 API is for those of wanting to port from 1.0? Thanks, Gary -Original Message- From: John Keyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 14:55 To: commons-dev Subject: [CLI] Latest news To whom it concerns, . I've

Re: [math] ACM license

I caution at assuming this is 'restrictive'. I would like to point out an important clause in this license that you should consider, I've received emails from ACM members who are following our project (I am actually an inactive ACM member myself). ACM is a member based organization just like Ap