Re: Prepare commons to JDK 9

Hi Ralph, On Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:56:32 -0700 Ralph Goers wrote: >> On Mar 7, 2018, at 2:47 AM, Stephen Colebourne >> wrote: >> >> 1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a >> six-month release which is about to be replaced by Java 10, which

Re: [imaging] IMAGING-154 remove Debug class

Hi Bruno, if it might also be helpful to our users, why not keep and provide it. As I understand it, the Debug class is a tool helping in development to analyze some behavior. Nothing stops us from declaring this class internal (we might even put it into a package "internal" or "debug") that

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Release Plugin 1.0 base on RC1

Am Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:35:52 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > I wonder if: > - This should be a LAZY VOTE since this is not an official component but > rather a tool +1 > - We should release it as 1.0 anyway (unless obvious bugs > are found) to avoid the chicken and egg problem: To really test

Re: Parent POM and automatic module name

Am Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:48:08 + schrieb sebb: > On 8 January 2018 at 00:25, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote: [snip] >>> The component poms I checked all include a comment like "Temporary >>> fix, remove this after this has implemented in pa

Re: Parent POM and automatic module name

Am Sun, 07 Jan 2018 12:04:16 +0100 schrieb Pascal Schumacher: > Am 07.01.2018 um 11:10 schrieb Stefan Bodewig: >> My memory (which is old and failing frequently) claims we didn't want >> to put it into the parent as not all components can use automatic >> module names (net hasn't got a single

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Release Apache Commons Parent 43 based on RC1

Sorry, I've missed the start of the vote, but I've changed the parent in the meanwhile to build these artifacts in the normal build. Am Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:19:48 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > We have updated plugins and are now ready to use Java 9 to build sites, > so I would like to release

Re: [parent] Release commons-parent 43

Am Mon, 01 Jan 2018 17:37:07 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > Hi All: > > Now that maven-site-plugin 3.7 is out and fixes building with Java 9, I > propose we release it. > > Thoughts? Can we move the generation of the -test.jar, -sources.jar and -test-sources.jar from the release profile into

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons JCS 2.2.1 based on RC3

Am Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:06:41 +0100 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > Hi Jorg, > > It doesnt break IDE support but has some "dead" code from my > understanding, > no? OK, I should have checked it myself. I got Oliver wrong and thought it contains only cruft, but the cruft is only additional ;-)

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons JCS 2.2.1 based on RC3

Hi Gary, Am Fri, 22 Dec 2017 12:34:13 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > Hi Jörg, > > Thank you for taking the time to review. > > The -sources jar are built by 'mvn deploy' I believe. We should change the parent and tie this goal to package phase. That phase is supposed to produce anything that

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons DBCP 2.2.0 based on RC3

+1 Works fine for me building from source with my compiler zoo from Java 1.7 to 9. -Cheers, Jörg Am Thu, 21 Dec 2017 11:23:10 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some enhancements since Apache > Commons DBCP 2.1.1 was released, so I would like to release

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons JCS 2.2.1 based on RC3

Hi, the build from source is fine for my compiler zoo from Java 1.7 to 9. However, if the final release contains broken -sources files, my vote is -1. Those files are very valuable e.g. developing with Eclipse, because they are used in the debugger to jump directly into the source, if you

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons RDF 0.5.0 based on RC3

Hi Bruno, Am Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:53:35 + schrieb Bruno P. Kinoshita: [snip] > I went through the FindBugs/PMD reports in each module, and found the > following warnings: > > > * main module: > - Double checked locking is not thread safe in Java. (saw it in > another part, not

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons RDF 0.5.0 based on RC3

Hi, Am Thu, 07 Dec 2017 20:51:57 -0800 schrieb Sergio Fernández: > Hi, > > once we addressed most of the issues from RC1 and RC2, I'd like to > propose to release Apache Commons RDF 0.5.0 based on RC. > > Apache Commons RDF aims to provide a common Java API for RDF 1.1 graphs > and datasets.

Re: [text] Adapt the Log4j 2 Interpolator to [text]

Hi Gary, Am Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:17:56 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > Hi All, > > Log4j 2 provides it's own copy of our StrSubstitutor/StrLookup framework > enhanced for Log4j's needs. In addition it provides a custom StrLookup > called Interpolator which allows for lookups like: > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Commons JUnit

Am Sun, 05 Nov 2017 08:43:06 -0700 schrieb Gary Gregory: > It sounds like we all like the idea of this new component. I'll create > the git repo tonight or by tomorrow morning at the latest. Hehe, it seems this idea pops up every decade ... http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/dormant/test/

Re: [LOGGING] Release with Java 9 Module support

Hi Benedikt, Benedikt Ritter wrote: [snip] >> AFAICS we have only commons-logging. The other artifacts have not been >> part of any release in the last decade. > > It looks like those artifacts have been published to maven central under > commons-logging:commons-logging coordinates [1]. I

Re: [LOGGING] Release with Java 9 Module support

Hi Stephen, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > On 26 September 2017 at 16:06, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> commons-logging.jar >> commons-logging-adapters.jar >> commons-logging-api.jar >> >> All jars have org.apache.commons.logging as root package, so if I >> understand correctly we

Re: [All][Math] New component: "Commons Geometry"?

Hi Jochen, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Gilles > wrote: > >> Because of "Commons" rules, it is not "equivalent": There was >> a long thread concluding that all modules must be released >> _together_, and with the same top-level package

Re: [All][Math] New component: "Commons Geometry"?

+1 Looks good to me. Gilles wrote: > Hello. > > [Time for a new episode in our "Ripping CM" series.] > > How about creating "Commons Geometry"? > > The rationale is comprised of the usual suspects: > * Smaller and more focused component, hence: > - Consistent development and

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

Hi Simon, Simon Spero wrote: > Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues were > with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't > work. This might have been fixed by now. > I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible. > > [The biggest

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

Hi Amey, Amey Jadiye wrote: > Hmm, isn't that easy with just Travis ? We just have to add java9 > option(not sure it have RC) and trigger build it will automatically check > build and tests. IIRC for few components we are having java9 Travis env > already set. That would only ensure that the

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

Hi, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote: >> Hi Benedikt, >> >> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its >> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and >> improve JDK 9. >> >> Now that we have reached the JDK

Re: Attaching Apache repository pushes to GitHub page

IIRC this will also add you automatically to the Apache Organization at GitHub ... Matt Sicker wrote: > Add your GitHub username to your LDAP profile by visiting > https://id.apache.org/ > > On 3 August 2017 at 06:55, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> >

Re: Attaching Apache repository pushes to GitHub page

Hi Eric, Eric Barnhill wrote: > I am applying for jobs soon and want my work on commons-numbers to be > visible on my GitHub page. However I am pushing to an Apache repository > rather than to my own fork, so it doesn't show up on my GitHub page. Is > there a way to link the two? it should work

Re: Modern dependencies among commons

Claude Warren wrote: > Perhaps change dependency so that it specifies minimum but leaves maximum > open. (unless there is an upper limit) commons-lang and commons-lang3 are no replacements, they are different artifacts. Switching from old to new requires changes in code. - Jörg

Re: Modern dependencies among commons

Hi Dave, Dave Brosius wrote: > Hi Folks, > > > I'd like to see all of our common components uptake the 'latest' > versions of other commons components, to encourage their adoption. For > instance, commons-beanutils still uses commons-collections 3, and so > when i want to use

Re: [all] Removal of old pgp key from https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS

Hi Amey Amey Jadiye wrote: > I observed we have lot of keys in > https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS, even keys of developers who > might have resigned from commons, can we just > review and remove keys of developers who resigned or no more active ? IMHO it depends on whether a key was

Re: [lang][collections] SortedProperties

Hi Gary, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi, > > I'd to have a new class called SortedProperties that extends > java.util.Properties. > > Should that go in [lang] or [collections]? > > I first thought [lang], but it _is_ a collection after all. > > Gary for me it's [collections]. [collections] is

Re: [jelly] Support for multiple build tools

Hi Oliver, Oliver Heger wrote: > Hi, > > locally I reworked the build of Jelly core to follow the Maven standard > layout. This of course renders all other build files dysfunctional. > > Are there any objections to drop these files? Maven 1 is probably no > longer in use anywhere. Most other

Re: [LANG] Add Automatic-Module-Name MANIFEST entry

Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2017-06-07, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> here [1] is my proposal on how to add the Automatic-Module-Name entry >> to MANIFEST. This just duplicates the maven-jar-plugin configuration >> from parent pom. I don’t want to wait much longer to release >> 3.6. After we have

OSGi Version at Package Level

Hi, maybe you have missed the discussion for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMPRESS-399, but in short we face a PR that introduces individual versions at package level for a component. Actually I can understand the reasoning from a logical point if view, but it fails for me completely

Re: [LOGGING] Logging and Java 9 (Was: Re: Compiler targets and Java 9)

Hi Benedict, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > (Moving this to a new topic, since it may cause a lengthy discussion :o)) > >> Am 05.06.2017 um 16:41 schrieb Jochen Wiedmann >> : >> >> Hi, >> >> thanks to Rob Rompkins, and his recent work on Fileupload, it came to >>

Re: [all] Java 9 module names

Stephen Colebourne wrote: > Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separately > from the command line, or add the module to the application's > module-info rather than the libraries. > > In general, I suspect a library module-info.java should depend only on > the other modules

Re: [lang] new concurrency annotations

Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > >> Am 18.04.2017 um 08:36 schrieb Gary Gregory : >> >> Hi All: >> >> We have two styles for the new concurrency annotations in master: >> >> (1) JCIP >> (2) Apache HttpComponents Core >> >> I would like to delete (1) in favor of (2). I

Re: [ALL] The Commons Math issue

Hi Oliver, Oliver Heger wrote: > Am 12.04.2017 um 19:39 schrieb Gilles: >> On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:25:03 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >>> On 04/12/2017 05:29 PM, Gilles wrote: >>> Do you actually prefer advertizing a non-Apache project rather than having the PMC support its own

Re: [VOTE] Release JEXL 3.1 based on RC1

+1, builds from source with my compiler zoo (except for Java 9) Cheers, Jörg Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Hi all, > > JEXL is ready for a new release, please review the artifacts and cast > your votes. > > Changes since 3.0: > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0 based on RC1

+1 Builds fine with my compiler zoo incl. Java 9. Rob Tompkins wrote: > Hello all, > > This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Text 1.0 (from RC1). > > Tag name: >commons-text-1.0-RC1 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag > -v') > > Tag URL: >

Re: ImmutablePair and compareTo()

Hi Matt, Matt Sicker wrote: > I took a look at this yesterday and forgot to reply. Anyways, I agree that > ImmutablePair should override compareTo() since it can rely on its own > values not changing, whereas the implementation in Pair isn't as crazy > since it's mutable. ImmutablePair is only

Re: [Numbers] Scope?

Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 19:28 +0100, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Hi Raymond, >> >> Raymond DeCampo wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Gilles >>> <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> >>> wrote: >&g

Re: [Numbers] Scope?

Hi Raymond, Raymond DeCampo wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Gilles > wrote: > >> >> A very important issue here: what JDK version do we target? >> >> I'd go for Java8, in the hope to revive interest in Commons from an >> audience that might be put off by

Re: [VOTE] Rename "Complex" to "Numbers" (Was: [complex] Make multi-module and rename component?)

+1 Gilles wrote: > See discussion thread, copied below. > > [ ] Yes > [ ] Yes but I prefer this name: ... > [ ] No, because ... > > I'll assume that this is a lazy consensus vote, to be closed in 72 > hours > from now (i.e. on January 12, at 18:00:00 UTC). > > Thanks, > Gilles

Re: [complex] Make multi-module and rename component?

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > How about renaming the component to "Commons Numbers" (or another name > if preferred) that would contain the following modules: > * commons-numbers-core (with classes such as "Precision"). > * commons-numbers-complex > * commons-numbers-quaternion > *

Re: [VOTE] Promote TEXT to Proper

+1 Rob Tompkins wrote: > Hello all, > > I propose that we move [text] to Commons Proper. > > -- > [ ] +1 Move [text] to Commons Proper > [ ] +0 I am fine with this move > [ ] -0 I am not too keen, because ... > [ ] -1 I am

Re: [text] TEXT-36 (Was: [text] 1.0 release progress)

Gilles wrote: > On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 23:05:25 +0100, Gilles wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 20:00:50 +0100, Jörg Schaible wrote: >>> Hi Gilles, >>> >>> Gilles wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 17:03:56 +0100, Jörg Schaible wrote: >>

Re: [text] TEXT-36 (Was: [text] 1.0 release progress)

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 17:03:56 +0100, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Gilles wrote: >> >>> Hi. >>> >>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 09:40:20 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> Person

Re: [text] TEXT-36 (Was: [text] 1.0 release progress)

Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 09:40:20 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> Personally, I would like to resolve the TEXT-36 and TEXT-42 Jira >> tickets before proceeding with the release, but I wanted to check to >> see if anyone else has any opinions on what work needs

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons JCS 2.0 based on RC1

+1 builds from source tarball with my compiler zoo except Java 9 (jar-plugin fails, unrelated to jcs). The layout of the binary tarball is somewhat different compared to other commons releases: - bin archive extracts into commons-jcs-2.0-bin instead of commons-jcs-2.0 - bin archive contains

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Release Commons Parent 42 Based on RC3

+1 Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi all > > as far as I can tell there has benver been a vote for RC2 but the tag > exists, therefore I went with RC3 > > Parent 42 RC3 is available for review here: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/commons-parent/42-RC3/ > (svn revision 17566)

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.13 based on RC1

+1 Builds successfully from source tarball with my compiler zoo except Java 9. However, this is currently such a moving target, therefore I consider its report more as a heads-up: %< == Failed tests: X5455_ExtendedTimestampTest.testSampleFile:185

Re: [ALL] Changing the commons process

Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Bernd Eckenfels [snip] >> Can you name a component where this is true? Afaik all Commons >> components have a full featured source archive which is buildable and a >> limited source attachment for maven. >> > >

Re: [ALL] Changing the commons process

Hi Charles, Charles Honton wrote: > I am incorrect about the contents of the sources zip. It does contain > all the files under source control. > > As a test, I replaced > ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-lang3/3.5/commons-lang3-3.5- src.jar ?? The default release profile of

Re: [all] Clirr or japicmp - does either work for anybody?

Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2016-12-21, Gilles wrote: > >> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:35:46 +0100, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >>> Hi > >>> I'm trying to figure out how to get a report on API changes in >>> compress. > >>> If I enable Clirr the site build dies with a NullPointerException (I >>> vaguely

Re: [parent] japicmp configuration

Hi Stefan, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi > > I've just figured out how to get japicmp working for me and have a few > questions / suggestions for the parent POM. > > Currently the configuration of the plugin happens inside the > pluginManagement section, not inside the japicmp profile. Should we

Re: [TEXT] Remove Commons Lang Dependency?

Pascal Schumacher wrote: > Am 19.12.2016 um 11:25 schrieb Pascal Schumacher: >> Am 18.12.2016 um 23:02 schrieb Jörg Schaible: >>> Actually I don't understand why do you want to remove it. It was made >>> dependent on purpose. The shade plugin - if properly configured

Re: [TEXT] Remove Commons Lang Dependency?

Pascal Schumacher wrote: > Hello everybody, > > commons-text currently depends on commons-lang. This dependency is > included into the jar via the maven shade plugin. > > Only two methods from lang are really needed: > > StringUtils#containsAny > > StringUtils#containsNone > > As

Re: [complex][math-util] dependencies

Hi Gary, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Gilles > wrote: [snip] >> By the way, you don't need to refer to "Runtime" in the names; >> all exceptions in such codes should be unchecked. >> > > I would say "it depends". An exception should be

Re: [REPORT][DRAFT] Apache Commons Board Report for December 2016

Hi Stian, no hurry. Gary mentioned in his original proposal that commons-rdf is on its way. We just give an overview of our activities. We can mention the final state in the next report again. Cheers, Jörg Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > We had waited for Infra to do the rename/move of the

Re: [CANCE][VOTE][LAZY] Release Commons Parent POM 42 based on RC1

Then trigger "skip" using a property and every project can set it if required. Gary Gregory wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Gary Gregory > wrote: > >> The answer is, as usual, "it depends". >> >> For Apache Commons Daemon, I would like to have the bin-zip in

Re: [complex][math-util] dependencies

Hi Eric, Eric Barnhill wrote: > I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather than > in the commons-complex JIRA. > > The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages: > > -- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.) > -- commons-math exceptions > --

Re: [ALL] Version number(s) for modular components

Gilles wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:31:36 -0700, Apache wrote: >> Gilles, >> >> If you try to do this you are going to get very frustrated with >> Maven. You cannot use the Maven Release plugin if all the versions >> are >> not SNAPSHOTs, and if they always have to be SNAPSHOTs it makes very

Re: [ALL] Version number(s) for modular components

Gary Gregory wrote: > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> > wrote: > >> Sorry, for me this is going down the wrong road. For me different >> versions mean different components. Allowing multiple versions for >> modules in one co

Re: [ALL] Version number(s) for modular components

Sorry, for me this is going down the wrong road. For me different versions mean different components. Allowing multiple versions for modules in one component will exactly open the can of worms Gilles described below. We had that already with Jakarta. I still propose commons-rng-tools as

Re: [RNG][ALL] Official vs "courtesy" code ?

Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > The "Commons RNG" component (in the "Apache Commons" sense), > consists of the following modules (in the "maven" sense) that > provide Java code: > (1) commons-rng-client-api > (2) commons-rng-core > (3) commons-rng-simple > (4) commons-rng-sampling > (5)

Re: [RNG][ALL] Official vs "courtesy" code ?

Hi, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > I think I'll tend towards agreeing with Jochen here, rather get half the > modules out early than fight ourselves with versioning workarounds if the > rest of the modules are not ready for prime time. > > However I see concerns of selective "part releases" and

Re: [RNG] Aggregate artefacts (for archive download)

Gilles wrote: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:12:33 -0800, Gary Gregory wrote: >> You use the assembly plugin. >> >> mvn assembly:single >> > > After running > $ mvn clean deploy assembly:single -Prelease -Ptest-deploy > > There is no single archive file containing all the distribution. > [Neither

Re: [VOTE] Accept Commons RDF as a new component

+1 Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > [Note: this is the Commons PMC vote on dev@commons - there's a > concurrent IPMC VOTE thread on general@incubator] > > Since Commons RDF entered incubation, it has evolved the understanding > of its purpose, developed and released code base that is now >

Re: [RNG] Build succeeds locally but fails on Travis-CI

Hi Sebb, sebb wrote: > Surely the commons build plugin is only needed to simplify setting up > some files? > > If it were not there, the files could still be updated manually. > > The doc page [1] makes it clear that the only _potential_ build-time > dependency is the copy-javadoc-files goal.

Re: [RNG] Build succeeds locally but fails on Travis-CI

Hi Gary, Gary Gregory wrote: > I was thinking the parent POM just had stuff that needed to be inherited > but since I have not looked it sounds like there is actual code in there? Just ressources, but they are referenced in the plugins' classpaths. > I am about to push a new version of

Re: [RNG] Build succeeds locally but fails on Travis-CI

Hi Gary, Gary Gregory wrote: > Why not put all this stuff in your parent POM? Parent project is the last to build. IMHO we need an own independent component for that. IIRC, those resources are not really commons-rng specific and might be useful for other commons components also. We already

Re: [RNG] Build succeeds locally but fails on Travis-CI

Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > Does someone know how to fix that? > See: >https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-rng/jobs/177715168 > > Thanks, > Gilles Delete your local repository (well, org/apache/commons/commons-rng) and you'll face the same. You cannot declare a dependency for a plutin that

Re: [ALL] How to "deploy" selectively (multi-module project)?

Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Gilles, > > Gilles schrieb am Do., 17. Nov. 2016 um > 00:38 Uhr: > >> Hello. >> >> For "Commons RNG" (branch "RNG-30__sampling"), >> >>$ mvn clean deploy -Prelease -Ptest-deploy >> >> fails with >> --- >> Failed to execute goal

Re: [Text] Any reason to not upgrade to lang 3.5

Rob Tompkins wrote: > > >> On Nov 8, 2016, at 9:38 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote: >> >> >>> On Nov 7, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Bruno P. Kinoshita >>> wrote: >>> >>> +1 to update away >>> >>> I think it could be a mistake while creating the

Re: [ALL] Maven plugins common configuration.

Hi Sebb, sebb wrote: > On 26 October 2016 at 17:50, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote: [snip] >> We have commons-build in proper. Don't know what it is used for, but it >> looks like an old Maven 1 project ;-) > > Commons-build is current. > It is e

Re: [ALL] Maven plugins common configuration.

Artem Barger wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Gilles > wrote: > >> could not find "commons-rng-build-tools" (posted a question in maven ML list). >>> >>> The reactor of Maven does not consider plugins itself or dependencies to >>> plugins for its

Re: [ALL] Maven plugins common configuration.

Hi Artem, Artem Barger wrote: > ​Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Gilles > wrote: > >> What is the command to "build everything"? >> >> > >> I tried >> $ mvn site >> > > ​Try "mvn install site" > ​ instead. For some reason dependencies between is not

Re: [ALL] Maven plugins common configuration.

Hi Artem, Artem Barger wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Jörg Schaible < > joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote: > >> You may put both parts into an own profile that is activated >> automatically at the extistence of pmd/pmd-ruleset.xml. Each component

Re: [ALL] Maven plugins common configuration.

Artem Barger wrote: > Hi, > > While working on creating multi module configuration for commons-rng > component I've extracted all configurations for maven plugins such as: > pmd, findbugs, checkstyle into separate module "commons-rng-build-tools". > Such that parent project can now refer to it

Re: [ALL] Get things moving with "random utilities"

Hi, Gary Gregory wrote: > To restate my opinion and that of others: It is not a good thing to end up > with components Commons Random A, Commons Random B, Commons Random C, and > so on. We already have a new Commons Random Something component. Related > code should be modules of that component.

Re: [Math] Changes on the 3.x line

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:57:03 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> Le 12/10/2016 à 16:15, Gilles a écrit : >> >>> The 3.x line is obsolete. >>> No new feature or bug-fix should be introduced there. >> >> Hi Gilles, >> >> I understand you don't want to invest time in

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

Dave Brosius wrote: > i think people understand an early product having breaking changes. The > interface is 'small' enough that having to redo a small amount of change > by clients is not an issue here. Whatever you do, it's likely that you > will get feedback from clients that you don't expect,

Re: [RNG] New implementations before release of 1.0

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:37 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Gilles wrote: >> >>> Hi. >>> >>> Release of version 1.0 will be delayed for another two weeks, >>> waiting for additional implementations. >> >>

Re: [RNG] New implementations before release of 1.0

Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > Release of version 1.0 will be delayed for another two weeks, > waiting for additional implementations. Then, please, cancel the still running vote also ;-) Cheers, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: commons-io git commit: Remove redundant type arguments.

Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > Adding .gitattributes just ensures any future changes will be correct. If > there are committed files with incorrect line endings in the repo they > will not be automatically be fixed. I fixed the remaining incorrect files > in 9e2b2c09732ca596331f7ca34ba4e0f03d70093d.

Re: AW: Java8 utilities

Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote: > >> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would >> target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6 level >> (this implies compiling the classes separately and recombining them in >> the final jar). > > From a users point of

Re: [MATH] Thoughts on some short term goals?

Hi Rob, Rob Tompkins wrote: > > >> On Sep 18, 2016, at 7:22 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >> >> Hello. >> >> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 16:07:41 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >>> Hi Rob, >>> >>> Rob Tompk

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

+1 builds for my compiler zoo from source from version 1.7 to 1.9 under Linux. Builds for 1.6 JDKs have to be made using a profile, but build incl. tests succeed then. Cheers, Jörg Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2). > > Tag name: >

Re: [MATH] Thoughts on some short term goals?

Hi Rob, Rob Tompkins wrote: > Hello, > > Given that the long term goals of commons-math are fairly uncertain, I > would like to attempt working with some short term goals. The hope here is > to think about questions along the lines of: "what can be done today/this > week/this month,” with the

Re: [CANCEL][VOTE][RC1] Release Commons Rng 1.0

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > I'll prepare RC2 in order to fix the following minor glitches: please have also a look at Emmanuel's comments first ... Cheers, Jörg > > * Name of the component "Commons Rng" -> "Apache Commons RNG". > Reported by Gary Gregory. > * Add (Github)

Re: [rng] New "checkstyle" config is checking "src/test"

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 02:12:21 +0300, Artem Barger wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Gilles >> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> It's something related to the plain >>> checkstyle:checkstyle >>> target. >> >> >> ​Added a rule to skip these

Re: [rng] JARs with different dependencies within the same component?

Gilles wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:53:44 +0300, Artem Barger wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Gilles >> >> wrote: >> >>> That's what I was afraid of; in this case, it would defeat the >>> purpose: >>> We shouldn't have to release "core-2.0" (thus a

Re: [rng] JARs with different dependencies within the same component?

Gilles wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 09:10:06 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Hi Gilles, >> >> Gilles wrote: >> >>> Hi. >>> >>> Suppose that >>>commons-rng-core-1.0.jar >>> depends on JDK 1.6. >>> >>&g

Re: [rng] JARs with different dependencies within the same component?

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > Suppose that >commons-rng-core-1.0.jar > depends on JDK 1.6. > > And that we wish to offer utilities (e.g. random strings) and other > syntactic sugar (such as Java 8 streams) in >commons-rng-utils-1.0.jar > that would depend on JDK 1.8. > > Is it

Re: [VOTE] Release Configuration 2.1 based on RC3

Builds from src tarball with my compiler zoo: +1 Oliver Heger wrote: > Hi all, > > after the failed votes for RC1 and RC2 a new RC has been created. There > has been further tweaking of the checkstyle configuration to solve build > problems on Java 1.6. > > Configuration 2.1 RC3 is available

RE: [MATH]: Current state of project?

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 09:35:43 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >> There are a number of dangling [VOTE] threads that seem to devolve >> into inconclusive discussion. Nevertheless, it would be useful for >> the creator of those votes to resolve them with [RESULT][VOTE]

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release CRYPTO 1.0.0 based on RC1

Hey, contratulations. I cannot remember the last time a RC1 passed the vote ;-) Sun, Dapeng wrote: > This vote passed[1].(Three binding +1, three non-binding +1, no +0 or -1). > > The following people voted on release CRYPTO 1.0.0: > > Benedikt Ritter+1 (binding) > Jör

RE: [VOTE] Release CRYPTO 1.0.0 based on RC1

Sun, Dapeng wrote: > Thank Jörg for the testing. > >>>I am building crypto with my compiler zoo on Gentoo Linux with OpenSSL >>>1.02h installed. > I don't have environment with Gentoo Linux, I just tested the library with > OpenJDK on pure Ubuntu OS: OpenJDK 7 on Ubuntu 14.04 and OpenJDK 8 on >

RE: [VOTE] Release CRYPTO 1.0.0 based on RC1

io.tmpdir=$HOME/tmp did the trick. Setting commons-crypto.tempdir the same way did not work. Cheers, Jörg > > Regards, > Xianda > > -Original Message- > From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@gmx.de] > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 5:04 AM > To: dev@commons.a

Re: [VOTE] Release CRYPTO 1.0.0 based on RC1

Hi, I am building crypto with my compiler zoo on Gentoo Linux with OpenSSL 1.02h installed. Even compiling with Java 9 works, tests fail only because of a missing jce. Running the tests I get always those two warnings: %< == Running

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons BCEL 6.0 based on RC8

+1, build from source tar ball works with my compiler zoo. Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi all, > > hopefully the final RC for releasing Apache Commons BCEL 6.0 :-) Changes > since RC7: > > - fixed failing build on Windows plattforms > - corrected fix for BCEL-262 > > Apache Commons BCEL 6.0 is

Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan

sebb wrote: [snip] > But longer term it might be better to release the JNI binaries > separately from the Java binaries. > This would allow new OSes to be added without having to re-release > everything. This one might help: http://maven-nar.github.io/ I've used a very old version of it

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >