Hi Matt!!
indeed the commit contains too much informations here, I changed the
XML config just to see if the ClassLoader adapter is able to load
primitives by name, just moving the code you committed in the
ObjectCreate builder, so shared classloader across multiple binding is
able to provide the
Hi,
Moreover, I start having the feeling the {{WeightedGraph}} is a
useless interface: it is enough marking the vertices/edges as weighted
depending on the problem... or not? At the end of the day,
{{WeightedGraph}} does nothing than having the the edges marked as
weighted, so Dijkstra
Hola Claudio!
for all algorithms implemented in the `shortestpath` package (A*,
Dijkstra, Bellmann-Ford, ...), I didn't have the need to add new
specific methods for {{WeightedGraph}}es since that interface was used
more as a marker - a direct graph, which edges are weighted (granted
by
Matt Benson-2 wrote
Maybe the right approach is to start with Java 6, then whoever likes to
can
investigate how much work it would take to restore Java 5
compatibility.
Seems like a reasonable proposal to me; it means Java 1.5 is a nice to
have feature - not a must have - feature as it
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:45 AM, henrib hen...@apache.org wrote:
Matt Benson-2 wrote
Maybe the right approach is to start with Java 6, then whoever likes to
can
investigate how much work it would take to restore Java 5
compatibility.
Seems like a reasonable proposal to me; it means Java
Hi Jörg;
I've amended the idea based on feedback to *internal* package and @internal
annotation (for pragmatic reasons: a good rule is one which is easy to
follow and enforce).
The naming convention or the annotation would allow clear but also explicit
boundary; documentation is necessary but not
Hi all guys,
to complete DIGESTER-153 we had to include CGLIB as new dependency,
actually I would like to experiment distributing an *additional*
artifact (jar) where dependencies are shaded - maybe also renamed for
internal use only.
Note that I don't want to replace the existing distribution, I
Hi Gary,
ad RAT - I added a license header for mime.types but doing this for
the mail messages is not possible AFAIK since there is no such thing as
a comment for mail messages
ad src zip - need to check since I did a last minute upgrade to the
latest commons-parent.pom
ad Clirr errors -
Hi Stefan,
sounds good - I will check
Siegfried Goeschl
On 06.12.11 16:52, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On 2011-12-06, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
ad RAT - I added a license header for mime.types but doing this for
the mail messages is not possible AFAIK since there is no such thing
as a comment for
Le 05/12/2011 16:14, Christian Grobmeier a écrit :
[+1] Yes, you may release the next major release of JEXL3 with a Java6
requirement
+1
I think the maintainers of a component can decide on their own which
jdk they want to support. If you want to support a newer Java with the
next big
I've recently switched to Commons Math, and I'm quite happy with it, but
I found the following a little weird.
RealMatrix has some very odd deprecations. In particular inverse(),
getDeterminant() and isSingular(). The last has the message:
Deprecated. as of release 2.0, replaced by the
Am 05.12.2011 23:02, schrieb Gary Gregory:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Oliver Heger
oliver.he...@oliver-heger.dewrote:
Am 03.12.2011 22:14, schrieb Gary Gregory:
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Oliver Heger
oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de**wrote:
Am 03.12.2011 17:18, schrieb Gary
As you may have noticed, I was working on the task of making the code
base ready for Java 1.5 (the tests are still missing). I mainly fixed
numerous warnings related to raw types and type safety, applied enhanced
for loops, added annotations, and replaced StringBuffer by StringBuilder.
If
On Dec 6, 2011, at 15:37, Oliver Heger oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de wrote:
Am 05.12.2011 23:02, schrieb Gary Gregory:
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Oliver Heger
oliver.he...@oliver-heger.dewrote:
Am 03.12.2011 22:14, schrieb Gary Gregory:
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Oliver Heger
+1, move to jdk6 (go to jdk7 if you want :)
On Dec 5, 2011 9:17 AM, henrib hen...@apache.org wrote:
Sorry to bug everyone again, I'm hopelessly trying to make Commons move a
little forward...
Since a 2-person opposition never breaks the tie, a vote is in order to
decide whether JEXL3 (aka
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-jexl-jexl-compat has an issue affecting its community
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:28 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 December 2011 17:13, William Speirs wspe...@apache.org wrote:
What is the rule on when you can switch Java versions? Is going from
http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
1.4 to 1.5 too small of a version number
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
Le 05/12/2011 20:22, Matt Benson a écrit :
I think all that Sebastian is saying is something like if you can
create your new, cool API and the only things you really miss from
Java 6 are @Override on interface implementation methods and
ServiceLoader, for example, maybe it's worth that tiny bit
19 matches
Mail list logo
