Hi,
with svn revision 1158060 the bcel.generic.Visitor interface has become
package private, breaking the Gump builds of Xalan XSLTC,
commons-javaflow and likely other downstream code.
Has this change been intentional?
Stefan
-
This is a vote to release Apache Commons VFS 2.0.
Changes made since the last candidate:
* Fixed the manifest error that was causing the build to fail.
* Changed the copyright date in the Notice file from 2010 to 2011.
* Removed the references to javamail from the Notice file.
* Removed all the
On Aug 16, 2011, at 23:47, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 04:30, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:14 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> FYI:
>>
>> What would need to be reversed out of trunk for a 1.6 binary compatible with
>> 1.5 is:
>>
>> [image: Error]Method 'public StringEncoder
On 2011-08-17, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 03:42, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On 2011-08-15, sebb wrote:
>>> For input, there might be a use case for leaving the stream open, in
>>> case some kind of recovery is possible.
>>> It would be useful to have a way of determining the input file point
On 2011-08-17, wrote:
> Propchange: commons/trunks-proper/
> --
> --- svn:externals (original)
> +++ svn:externals Wed Aug 17 04:25:55 2011
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ attributes https://svn.apache.org/repos/
> bcel https://svn.ap
On 17 August 2011 04:30, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:14 PM, sebb wrote:
...
> FYI:
>
> What would need to be reversed out of trunk for a 1.6 binary compatible with
> 1.5 is:
>
> [image: Error]Method 'public StringEncoderComparator()' has been removed
> org.apache.commons.co
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:14 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 01:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Aug 16, 2011, at 19:40, sebb wrote:
> >
> >> On 17 August 2011 00:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>> On Aug 16, 2011, at 18:01, sebb wrote:
> >>>
> On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
On 17 August 2011 03:42, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2011-08-15, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 15 August 2011 09:56, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>> Hi,
>
>>> while working on the Zip64 stuff I deliberately created some invalid
>>> archives to test I get the expected exceptions. While doing so I
>>> realized I c
On 17 August 2011 01:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2011, at 19:40, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 17 August 2011 00:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> On Aug 16, 2011, at 18:01, sebb wrote:
>>>
On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies
> w
On 2011-08-15, sebb wrote:
> On 15 August 2011 09:56, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> Hi,
>> while working on the Zip64 stuff I deliberately created some invalid
>> archives to test I get the expected exceptions. While doing so I
>> realized I couldn't close the underlying stream because
>> ZipArchive
On Aug 16, 2011, at 19:40, sebb wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 00:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Aug 16, 2011, at 18:01, sebb wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies
wrote:
>> Please see the recent discussion on a
On 17 August 2011 00:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2011, at 18:01, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies
>>> wrote:
>>>
> Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
> propose "
The 72 hours has elapsed.
Voting was as follows:
+1, PMC member (all both sub-votes)
=
Matt Benson
Henri Yandell
Stefan Bodewig
Luc Maisonobe
Christian Grobmeier
Simone Tripodi
Gary Gregory
Oliver Heger
James Carman
Daniel F. Savarese
Sebastian Bazley
There were no other votes, so th
On Aug 16, 2011, at 18:01, sebb wrote:
> On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies wrote:
>>
Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
propose " encode()"
Gary
>>>
>>> Hi, Gary!!!
>>>
>>> I
On 13 August 2011 01:13, sebb wrote:
> BSF [1] needs to move out of Jakarta.
>
> It's not really big enough to warrant its own TLP.
>
> IMO Commons would be a good alternative home for BSF.
>
> Can we please vote to:
>
> 1. Accept BSF as a Commons Component
>
> 2. Offer Commons karma to BSF develo
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-javaflow has an issue affecting its community integration.
This is
Le 16/08/2011 22:27, Oliver Heger a écrit :
Aren't we free to decide how to represent data structures in a
configuration? I mean, the dot keys used by XMLConfiguration is also
just a convention. We could transform a plist file to a XML-friendly
structure and store it in a hierarchical configurat
On 16 August 2011 22:53, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies wrote:
>
>> > Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
>> > propose " encode()"
>> >
>> > Gary
>> >
>>
>> Hi, Gary!!!
>>
>> I thought of replying to that thread, but I though
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Julius Davies wrote:
> > Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
> > propose " encode()"
> >
> > Gary
> >
>
> Hi, Gary!!!
>
> I thought of replying to that thread, but I thought it's kinda rude to
> hijack a thread like that.
>
> What
On 16 August 2011 22:23, Julius Davies wrote:
>> Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
>> propose " encode()"
>>
>> Gary
>>
>
> Hi, Gary!!!
>
> I thought of replying to that thread, but I thought it's kinda rude to
> hijack a thread like that.
>
> What would be the
I misunderstood CHAIN-53 then.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Elijah Zupancic wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I haven't heard any discussion about a pending refactor to chain in
> the last month (when I proposed the patch). Could you tell me/us more
> about any plans for a major refactoring?
>
> Thanks,
Hi Paul,
I haven't heard any discussion about a pending refactor to chain in
the last month (when I proposed the patch). Could you tell me/us more
about any plans for a major refactoring?
Thanks,
-Elijah
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> I may have missed the discussion...
> Please see the recent discussion on adding generics to [codec] where I
> propose " encode()"
>
> Gary
>
Hi, Gary!!!
I thought of replying to that thread, but I thought it's kinda rude to
hijack a thread like that.
What would be the pros/cons of just typing "svn remove Encoder.java"
and "svn re
Here is an example from the perspective of somebody adding a new kind of
matrix.
Take the two kinds of matrix as RandomTrinaryMatrix(rows, columns, p) that
has elements that are -1, 0 or 1. 1 and -1 have equal probabilities of p/2.
The value of p should be in [0,1].
It would be very nice if the
On 8/16/11 4:46 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> I understood what he was suggesting. I still disagree. Dynamic dispatch
>> and non-lattice typing structure is still required to make this all work.
>> Java doesn't really do that. Pretending that what Java does is sufficient
>> is hammer-lo
http://wiki.apache.org/commons/CreatingReleases for most of the information
as I am using the maven release plugin. But I'm also referring to
http://commons.apache.org/releases/index.html to try to make sure nothing is
missed. This process has been a bit painful for me as most commons projects
aren
I may have missed the discussion... but are we releasing a Java 5
genericized version first before major refactoring?
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Elijah Zupancic wrote:
> Hi Simo,
>
> Yes, the patch is binary compatible with the old chain with one exception:
>
> org.apache.commons.chain.web.
Hi Julius!
I am not a fan of these interfaces because they are not typed, "Object
encode(Object)" is too vague now that Generics have been an option for
years.
The interfaces are a good idea if you want to process the same data with
similar but different codecs and use the same code. So there is
Hi Simo,
Yes, the patch is binary compatible with the old chain with one exception:
org.apache.commons.chain.web.servlet.ServletHeaderValuesMap on line
97. Previously the API was returning Set> when by all indications it actually should have
been returning Set>. I believe that I fixed a
previousl
Am 16.08.2011 10:40, schrieb Ralph Goers:
On Aug 15, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
I would release 1.7 without vfs 2.0, we can still release 1.8 later when
vfs is ready.
Probably a question of time. If the vfs 2.0 release is a matter of some days or
weeks, this is no problem. The r
Am 16.08.2011 10:06, schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
Le 15/08/2011 21:39, Oliver Heger a écrit :
To be honest, I think the branch is a mess.
Maybe [configuration] should follow the road other components have gone
before: make the APIs ready for Java 5+, but do only limited
refactoring. Ideally, this c
Hi,
What do people think of the Encoder / Decoder interface in
commons-codec? Do people use it?
I know in my own usage patterns of commons-codec, I always go straight
for the concrete class that I want, and I never make use of the
Encoder / Decoder interface.
I'm in grad school right now, and
Hi.
> I understood what he was suggesting. I still disagree. Dynamic dispatch
> and non-lattice typing structure is still required to make this all work.
> Java doesn't really do that. Pretending that what Java does is sufficient
> is hammer-looking-for-a-nail, not solving the problems at hand
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
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-javaflow has an issue affecting its community integration.
This is
Hi all,
I am considering to use resp. extend Apache Commons VFS by a component
accessing Excel files (via Apache POI). The Excel file as such would be
a "folder", the sheets contained in it are "files". The result would be
commited to the VFS project.
However, before starting, I have to clarify t
Le 15/08/2011 15:51, Christian Grobmeier a écrit :
OGNL [1] has checked off all status items in the incubator.
Most of the OGNL developers are already commons developers and the
risk of failure is pretty small, even without having made a release.
As the Commons project is already very experience
Hi again Elijah,
as a side note, since you already submitted the ICLA - and I hope you
are interested on continuing to submit contributions - I suggest you
to start reading the Apache Committers guide[1] and how the ASF works
doc[2] to get more familiar with the Apache way... hopefully you will
bec
Hi Elijah,
looking at the patch, it seems that v2.0 is binary compatible to old
chain, right?
I mean, if in a my hypothetical application I would upgrade to v2
(generics a part) old code should continue working, right?
TIA, and count also on me!
All the best, have a nice day!
Simo
http://people.ap
+1
YAY
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> (OGNL committer) +1
>
> 2011/8/15 Christian Grobmeier :
>> OGNL [1] has checked off all status items in the incubator.
>>
>> Most of the OGNL developers are already
On Aug 15, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
>> I would release 1.7 without vfs 2.0, we can still release 1.8 later when
>> vfs is ready.
>
> Probably a question of time. If the vfs 2.0 release is a matter of some days
> or weeks, this is no problem. The release preparations for [configura
On Aug 16, 2011, at 1:16 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 15/08/2011 23:02, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>> I don't know. I think it really needs a refactoring. We always said that
>> all configurations should be based on HierarchicalConfiguration but that
>> still hasn't happened. Attribute splittin
Le 15/08/2011 23:02, Ralph Goers a écrit :
I don't know. I think it really needs a refactoring. We always said that all
configurations should be based on HierarchicalConfiguration but that still
hasn't happened. Attribute splitting and delimiter parsing have been a pain.
I think it would be
Le 15/08/2011 21:39, Oliver Heger a écrit :
To be honest, I think the branch is a mess.
Maybe [configuration] should follow the road other components have gone
before: make the APIs ready for Java 5+, but do only limited
refactoring. Ideally, this could even be done in a binary compatible
way.
44 matches
Mail list logo
