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
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-dbutils has an issue affecting its community integration.
This iss
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-chain2 has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issu
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-digester3 has an issue affecting its community integration.
This i
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-dbcp2 has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
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-dbcp has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 11:22:21AM -0500, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In my view there are two related but separate issues: (1) What should we
> do for 3.1 release, and (2) How do we want to design the optimization
> package for the future, such that it is easily extended to linear and
> no
On 3 December 2012 22:11, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 12/03/2012 11:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> Note that Commons IO 2.4 requires a minimum of JDK 1.6.
>
> ok, reverted to IO 2.2.
>
>>
>> net.sf.retrotranslator
>> retrotranslator-runtime
>> -1.2.1
On 12/03/2012 11:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Note that Commons IO 2.4 requires a minimum of JDK 1.6.
ok, reverted to IO 2.2.
>
> net.sf.retrotranslator
> retrotranslator-runtime
> -1.2.1
> +1.2.9
> test
>
> Is th
Note that Commons IO 2.4 requires a minimum of JDK 1.6.
Gary
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:27 PM, wrote:
> Author: tn
> Date: Mon Dec 3 21:27:34 2012
> New Revision: 1416672
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1416672&view=rev
> Log:
> Upgrade test dependencies: commons-io:2.4, retrotranslat
On 3 December 2012 21:27, wrote:
> Author: tn
> Date: Mon Dec 3 21:27:34 2012
> New Revision: 1416672
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1416672&view=rev
> Log:
> Upgrade test dependencies: commons-io:2.4, retrotranslator-runtime:1.2.9,
> subethasmtp:3.1.7
>
> Modified:
> commons/pro
On 3 December 2012 19:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Thomas Neidhart
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/03/2012 01:01 PM, sebb wrote:
>> > On 3 December 2012 11:39, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> >> I think it's time to update to Java 5... it is almost 2013!
>> >
>> > Agreed - unless there is
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Thomas Neidhart
wrote:
> On 12/03/2012 01:01 PM, sebb wrote:
> > On 3 December 2012 11:39, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >> I think it's time to update to Java 5... it is almost 2013!
> >
> > Agreed - unless there is a particular reason why it should remain at
> Java 1.4?
On 12/03/2012 01:01 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 3 December 2012 11:39, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> I think it's time to update to Java 5... it is almost 2013!
>
> Agreed - unless there is a particular reason why it should remain at Java 1.4?
fine for me too. Shall we make this visible via an issue, or is it
Hi,
In my view there are two related but separate issues: (1) What should we do for
3.1 release, and (2) How do we want to design the optimization package for the
future, such that it is easily extended to linear and non-linear constraints,
sparse matrix operations, etc.
In regards to (1),
I f
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 04:58:30PM -0500, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> >
> > I would propose to simply revert my changes on the optimization package
> > and prepare for a reorganization for 4.0. I understand I focused only on
> > the type of problems Gilles and myself routinely use, i .e. small siz
The Apache Commons Net team are pleased to announce the release of
Commons Net version 3.2.
All users are encouraged to upgrade to 3.2.
For details of the fixes and new features please see:
http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/net/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
[These are also included with the binary and sou
On 3 December 2012 11:39, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I think it's time to update to Java 5... it is almost 2013!
Agreed - unless there is a particular reason why it should remain at Java 1.4?
> Gary
>
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:37, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>
>> On 12/02/2012 11:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
I think it's time to update to Java 5... it is almost 2013!
Gary
On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:37, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 12/02/2012 11:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> This should be a place to use var args...
>
> Thanks for the hint, in this case I could not use it as email still has
> to be (source
On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 11:23:58PM +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>
>
>
> Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>
> >Hello.
> >
> >> >
> >> > I would propose to simply revert my changes on the optimization
> >package
> >> > and prepare for a reorganization for 4.0. I understand I focused
> >only on
> >> >
21 matches
Mail list logo
