On 26/04/2010, sebb wrote:
> On 26/04/2010, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:48 PM, sebb wrote:
> > > On 26/04/2010, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> > >> I'd query d...@maven.apache.org for the recommended procedure.
The initial suggestion was to use Nexus and regenerate the
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project commons-math has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
On 29/04/2010, er...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: erans
> Date: Thu Apr 29 12:12:17 2010
> New Revision: 939297
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=939297&view=rev
> Log:
> Copy of current revision.
I thought the idea was to create a sandbox of just the cal10n sample,
at least initially
Is there any point keeping the mantissa/ and experimental/ source
trees under trunk?
They are not included in the Ant or Maven builds or source releases.
I suggest that they are moved to a branch.
Thoughts?
-
To unsubscribe, e-
> I thought the idea was to create a sandbox of just the cal10n sample,
> at least initially.
>
> That will make it much easier to see what is going on.
>
> Having the whole of Math is unnecessary intially, and perhaps ever.
I don't understand. What more will you have with a copy there of only
On 29/04/2010, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > I thought the idea was to create a sandbox of just the cal10n sample,
> > at least initially.
> >
> > That will make it much easier to see what is going on.
> >
> > Having the whole of Math is unnecessary intially, and perhaps ever.
>
>
> I don't unde
- "sebb" a écrit :
> Is there any point keeping the mantissa/ and experimental/ source
> trees under trunk?
>
> They are not included in the Ant or Maven builds or source releases.
>
> I suggest that they are moved to a branch.
>
> Thoughts?
Concerning Mantissa, I would even suggest to r
- "sebb" a écrit :
> On 29/04/2010, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > > I thought the idea was to create a sandbox of just the cal10n
> sample,
> > > at least initially.
> > >
> > > That will make it much easier to see what is going on.
> > >
> > > Having the whole of Math is unnecessary inti
> > I don't understand. What more will you have with a copy there of only the
> > files that are already available on JIRA?
>
> Being able to build it with IDEs and run tests using IDEs or Maven.
> Easier to collaborate on changes.
But you'll be able to do that with the whole thing too.
The alt
On 29/04/2010, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > > I don't understand. What more will you have with a copy there of only the
> > > files that are already available on JIRA?
> >
> > Being able to build it with IDEs and run tests using IDEs or Maven.
> > Easier to collaborate on changes.
>
>
> But yo
On 29/04/2010, sebb wrote:
> On 26/04/2010, sebb wrote:
> > On 26/04/2010, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:48 PM, sebb wrote:
> > > > On 26/04/2010, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> > > >> I'd query d...@maven.apache.org for the recommended procedure.
>
>
> The initial
The protections on many of the commons directories in the Apache
release repo look wrong to me.
Rather than have group "commons", many of them have group "committers".
Also, many of them don't have group write access (possibly a good
thing for the ones that have group committers!).
Seems to me t
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:59 AM, sebb wrote:
> The protections on many of the commons directories in the Apache
> release repo look wrong to me.
>
> Rather than have group "commons", many of them have group "committers".
>
> Also, many of them don't have group write access (possibly a good
> thin
- "sebb" a écrit :
> The protections on many of the commons directories in the Apache
> release repo look wrong to me.
>
> Rather than have group "commons", many of them have group
> "committers".
>
> Also, many of them don't have group write access (possibly a good
> thing for the ones th
14 matches
Mail list logo
