Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=7745&projectId=98
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Wed 27 Apr 2011 07:28:57 +
Finished at: Wed 27 Apr 2011 07:33:24 +
Total time: 4m 27s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
hard to understand without any scm detail; follow below details about
my local env.
The sipped tests are the @deprecated old that I put on @Ignore + the
stuck one reported to the issue
any hint? thanks,
Simo
$ mvn --version
Apache Maven 2.2.1 (r801777; 2009-08-06 21:16:01+0200)
Java version: 1.6.0
Hi.
Was it decided to use
@version $Id$
instead of
@version $Revision$ $Date$
?
If so, the corresponding check in "checkstyle.xml" must be changed.
Regards,
Gilles
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.o
On 27 April 2011 12:56, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Was it decided to use
> @version $Id$
> instead of
> @version $Revision$ $Date$
> ?
Or even
@version $Revision$
So long as we don't use $Date$ I don't care
> If so, the corresponding check in "checkstyle.xml" must be changed.
>
>
> Reg
Le 27/04/2011 13:54, er...@apache.org a écrit :
> Author: erans
Hi Gilles,
> Date: Wed Apr 27 11:54:16 2011
> New Revision: 1097088
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1097088&view=rev
> Log:
> MATH-561
> Map a value to the interval [O, period).
>
> Modified:
>
> commons/proper/math/
Le 27/04/2011 13:50, sebb a écrit :
> On 27 April 2011 12:56, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> Was it decided to use
>> @version $Id$
>> instead of
>> @version $Revision$ $Date$
>> ?
>
> Or even
>
> @version $Revision$
>
> So long as we don't use $Date$ I don't care
>
>> If so, the corres
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 02:04:43PM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 27/04/2011 13:54, er...@apache.org a écrit :
> > Author: erans
>
> Hi Gilles,
>
> > Date: Wed Apr 27 11:54:16 2011
> > New Revision: 1097088
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1097088&view=rev
> > Log:
> > MATH-561
>
I've cleaned up some old releases (collections-2.1.1, digester-2.0, codec-1.4)
There are still some components with multiple releases (e.g. digester
1.8.1 / 2.1, net 1.4.1/ 2.2) but these are for different Java
versions, and have different major versions.
For all components except DBCP, there is
All Commons components other than DBCP have at most one current
version per major release (e.g. NET has 1.4.1 and 2.2).
DBCP uses a different versioning scheme from all other components:
DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
DBCP 1.3 for JDBC 3 (JDK 1.4-1.5)
This is rather confusing.
Seems to me it wou
I've updated the README.html file to describe the difference between
1.3 and 1.4.
I also deleted the *current" soft links as they don't make sense for DBCP.
[I don't think they help generally, but that is a different argument]
These changes (particularly the deletions) may take a day or two to
re
sebb wrote:
> All Commons components other than DBCP have at most one current
> version per major release (e.g. NET has 1.4.1 and 2.2).
>
> DBCP uses a different versioning scheme from all other components:
>
> DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
> DBCP 1.3 for JDBC 3 (JDK 1.4-1.5)
>
> This is rather
On 4/27/11 6:29 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> sebb wrote:
>
>> All Commons components other than DBCP have at most one current
>> version per major release (e.g. NET has 1.4.1 and 2.2).
>>
>> DBCP uses a different versioning scheme from all other components:
>>
>> DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
>> DBCP
On 4/27/11 1:01 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> hard to understand without any scm detail; follow below details about
> my local env.
> The sipped tests are the @deprecated old that I put on @Ignore + the
> stuck one reported to the issue
> any hint? thanks,
See the comment at the top of the test case
Thanks for the explanation Phil, much more than appreciated!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 4/27/11 1:01 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> hard to understand without any scm detail; follow below details a
IMO:
DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
=> Bump it to 2.0.
DBCP 1.3 for JDBC 3 (JDK 1.4-1.5)
=> Stays as is.
Gary
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:05 AM, sebb wrote:
> All Commons components other than DBCP have at most one current
> version per major release (e.g. NET has 1.4.1 and 2.2).
>
> DBCP uses a
On 4/27/11 8:30 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> IMO:
>
> DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
> => Bump it to 2.0.
>
> DBCP 1.3 for JDBC 3 (JDK 1.4-1.5)
> => Stays as is.
This is essentially the plan that we agreed to a year ago. The only
difference in what you have above is that we will likely cut at
least an
Ah - I thought the plan was for OGNL to come to Commons. I'm a little
out of it - flu + newborn child :)
Hen
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi Henri,
> ouch, I already requested a proper one to use!!! :(
> Unless OGNL will be voted to be accepted as a proper Commons com
On 4/27/11 4:54 AM, er...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: erans
> Date: Wed Apr 27 11:54:16 2011
> New Revision: 1097088
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1097088&view=rev
> Log:
> MATH-561
> Map a value to the interval [O, period).
>
> Modified:
>
> commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java
Hi Hen!
yes the plan is migrating OGNL to Commons once read, but we should
complete the incubation phase first, or not? I suppose OGNL's path
should be the same of Sanselan's one...
Congrats for the newborn child!!! :)
Have a nice day,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99sof
Hi all guys!
After the failed RC1, I'm here to propose a new Apache
Commons-DIscovery release, based on RC2, please cast your votes!
Many thanks in advance to everybody will take part to the vote process :)
All the best,
Simo
Release notes:
http://people.apache.org/builds/commons/discovery/0.5/RC
Gary Gregory wrote:
> IMO:
>
> DBCP 1.4 for JDBC 4 (JDK 1.6)
> => Bump it to 2.0.
>
> DBCP 1.3 for JDBC 3 (JDK 1.4-1.5)
> => Stays as is.
As Phil said, it was discussed at release time. The main reason to go with
this version scheme is, that you can simply exchange the 1.3.x with 1.4.x
versio
Thanks :)
If the plan is to end up in Commons post-incubation, then I'd strongly
suggest you use the same mailing lists. Commons is relatively unique
in that all the components share the same mailing list. OGNL should
get used to that from the beginning, plus it will bring more interest
in on 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
Thanks to the kind soul who added the test reports to the gump
metadata, we now can see the failure was here:
Testsuite: org.apache.commons.math.optimization.direct.CMAESOptimizerTest
Tests run: 21, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 9.898 sec
Testcase:
testMaximize(org.apache.commons.math.op
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-scxml-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>> >> On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible"
>> wrote:
>> >>
>>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> These are the current blocking items in play afaik:
>
> * Email thread - what else should implement Formattable?
Sounds like this is now:
* Update javadoc for Mutable classes to indicate that they can't do
much to make them useful in Strin
> If the plan is to end up in Commons post-incubation, then I'd strongly
> suggest you use the same mailing lists. Commons is relatively unique
> in that all the components share the same mailing list. OGNL should
> get used to that from the beginning, plus it will bring more interest
> in on the C
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-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
The build runs fine under Windows 7 with Java 1.5 and 1.6. Site and
artifacts look good.
Here are some minor comments:
- The binaries are missing md5 files. Not sure whether they are really
required, but other components use to have them.
- In the release notes under "Introduction" it may be us
I'm a bit concerned by the low test coverage (~40%). Some classes like
ServiceDiscoveryTask are not even tested.
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 27/04/2011 21:38, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
Hi all guys!
After the failed RC1, I'm here to propose a new Apache
Commons-DIscovery release, based on RC2, please c
31 matches
Mail list logo
