Re: [lang3] Test Fail in Headless Mode (at Least on a Mac)

2010-12-01 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 2010-12-01, Henri Yandell wrote: > I've fixed this in r1040879. I can confirm it is fixed for Gump as well. I removed all awt.headless settings from the Gump descriptor and the build still passes on adam. Thanks! Stefan -

Re: [Commons Wiki] Update of "CodeStyle" by sebbapache

2010-12-01 Thread sebb
On 30 November 2010 21:18, Ralph Goers wrote: > > On Nov 30, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Apache Wiki wrote: > >> Dear Wiki user, >> >> You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Commons Wiki" for >> change notification. >> >> The "CodeStyle" page has been changed by sebbapache. >> The comment

Re: [pool] Pool config vs. factory hierarchies.

2010-12-01 Thread Gary Gregory
On Dec 1, 2010, at 2:01, "Simone Tripodi" wrote: > Hi Gary :) > thanks for the feedback, IMHO once the Configuration for > Generic(Keyed)ObjectPool(Factory) will be fixed, we could start > thinking about a new release of the new pool. This evening/tonight (in > my local time) I'll start re-arrang

Re: [pool] Pool config vs. factory hierarchies.

2010-12-01 Thread Simone Tripodi
Hi Gary, yes, more people involved on defining these details is better, I agree. I'm thinking about creating a wiki page to resume all the requirements, what do you think? Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >

RE: [pool] Pool config vs. factory hierarchies.

2010-12-01 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Simone Tripodi [mailto:simone.trip...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 08:51 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [pool] Pool config vs. factory hierarchies. > > Hi Gary, > yes, more people involved on defining these details is better, I

Re: [lang3] Test Fail in Headless Mode (at Least on a Mac)

2010-12-01 Thread Matt Benson
On Dec 1, 2010, at 2:45 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2010-12-01, Henri Yandell wrote: > >> I've fixed this in r1040879. > > I can confirm it is fixed for Gump as well. I removed all awt.headless > settings from the Gump descriptor and the build still passes on adam. > Having thought I was

[math] max evaluations in new root solvers

2010-12-01 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Hello everyone, In the recent changes for 3.0, the solvers now have a setting for a maximal number of function evaluations rather than a max number of iterations. This number cannot be specified at construction time, but only using a setMaxEvaluations() method declared in the BaseUnivariateRealSol

Re: [math] max evaluations in new root solvers

2010-12-01 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hi. > In the recent changes for 3.0, the solvers now have a setting for a > maximal number of function evaluations rather than a max number of > iterations. This number cannot be specified at construction time, but > only using a setMaxEvaluations() method declared in the > BaseUnivariateRealSolve

Re: [math] max evaluations in new root solvers

2010-12-01 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 01/12/2010 20:31, Gilles Sadowski a écrit : > Hi. Hi Gilles, > >> In the recent changes for 3.0, the solvers now have a setting for a >> maximal number of function evaluations rather than a max number of >> iterations. This number cannot be specified at construction time, but >> only using a

Re: [math] max evaluations in new root solvers

2010-12-01 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hello. > >> In the recent changes for 3.0, the solvers now have a setting for a > >> maximal number of function evaluations rather than a max number of > >> iterations. This number cannot be specified at construction time, but > >> only using a setMaxEvaluations() method declared in the > >> BaseU