Hi Phil,
Phil Steitz wrote:
Jörg Schaible wrote:
[snip]
Running the source distribution through my compiler zoo. JRockit 1.5
fails still
(http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/109929/focus=109945),
but we agreed already last time to ignore that. Building with Ant/IBM
Hi,
I checked one of the tests and I assume that all of the above are JUnit 4.x
tests ...? My Ant/lib contains only JUnit 3.8.x. Should JUnit 4.x be
provided with the build or with Ant?
When I was updating SVD, I noticed that parts of the tests were 3.x syntax
whereas other 4.x (way easier to
Hi Dimitri,
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Hi,
I checked one of the tests and I assume that all of the above are JUnit
4.x tests ...? My Ant/lib contains only JUnit 3.8.x. Should JUnit 4.x be
provided with the build or with Ant?
When I was updating SVD, I noticed that parts of the tests were
Jorg,
When I was updating SVD, I noticed that parts of the tests were 3.x syntax
whereas other 4.x (way easier to use I think). I would advocate for the
generalisation of Junit 4.x tests whenever possible.
Well, I think no one is against this, unless somebody does the work ;-)
However, this
Hi Dimitri,
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Jorg,
When I was updating SVD, I noticed that parts of the tests were 3.x
syntax
whereas other 4.x (way easier to use I think). I would advocate for the
generalisation of Junit 4.x tests whenever possible.
Well, I think no one is against this, unless
Jorg,
With Ant 1.7.0 all tests pass for me also. It seems that Ant 1.6.5 simply
does not yet support JUnit 4.x OOTB.
Are we supposed to guarantee backward compatibility that old?
Regards,
Dim.
Dimitri Pourbaix
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Jorg,
With Ant 1.7.0 all tests pass for me also. It seems that Ant 1.6.5 simply
does not yet support JUnit 4.x OOTB.
Are we supposed to guarantee backward compatibility that old?
No. However, it might be good to add an echo task explaining that the JUnit
4.x
Jörg Schaible a écrit :
Hi Dimitri,
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Hi,
I checked one of the tests and I assume that all of the above are JUnit
4.x tests ...? My Ant/lib contains only JUnit 3.8.x. Should JUnit 4.x be
provided with the build or with Ant?
When I was updating SVD, I noticed that
Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Jörg Schaible a écrit :
Hi Dimitri,
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Hi,
I checked one of the tests and I assume that all of the above are JUnit
4.x tests ...? My Ant/lib contains only JUnit 3.8.x. Should JUnit 4.x be
provided with the build or with Ant?
When I was updating
On 30/03/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Jörg Schaible a écrit :
Hi Dimitri,
Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
Hi,
I checked one of the tests and I assume that all of the above are JUnit
4.x tests ...? My Ant/lib contains only JUnit 3.8.x.
Phil Steitz wrote:
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled with the binary distribution:
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled with the binary distribution:
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled with the binary distribution:
This vote has passed with +1 votes from
Luc Maisonobe *
Niall Pemberton *
Henri Yandell *
Bill Barker *
Jörg Schaible *
Sebastian Bazley *
Phil Steitz *
Dimitri Pourbaix
Michael Heuer
and no other votes.
Thanks to all who helped prepare, review and improve this release!
Phil
* = Commons PMC
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Phil,
Phil Steitz wrote:
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled
Phil Steitz a écrit :
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled with the binary distribution:
Everything looks good except I have one question about the
LICENSE/NOTICE files - in the NOTICE file it says it includes software
developed by Benjamin McCann which is copyright Google - but I don't
see anything related to that in the LICENSE file - what license is/was
that code?
Niall
On Sun,
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
Everything looks good except I have one question about the
LICENSE/NOTICE files - in the NOTICE file it says it includes software
developed by Benjamin McCann which is copyright Google - but I don't
see anything
Niall Pemberton a écrit :
Everything looks good except I have one question about the
LICENSE/NOTICE files - in the NOTICE file it says it includes software
developed by Benjamin McCann which is copyright Google - but I don't
see anything related to that in the LICENSE file - what license
--
From: Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 8:31 PM
To: Commons Developers List dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release math 2.1 based on RC3
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags
Tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/math/tags/MATH_2_1_RC3/
Distributions:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/math-2.1-RC3/maven/
Documentation bundled with the binary distribution:
21 matches
Mail list logo