On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 5:49 AM Paul King wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A little while back I created a Mastodon account at:
>
> https://fosstodon.org/@ApacheGroovy
>
> At the time, this was mostly just to reserve it while we watched and waited
> to see what might happen with the turmoil at twitter.
>
>
Great to see this!!!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 3:49 PM Remko Popma wrote:
>
> Nice work, Paul!
>
> Remko.
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 2019, at 3:30, Paul King wrote:
> >
> > Dear community,
> >
> > The Apache Groovy team is pleased to announce version 3.0.0-rc-2 of
> > Apache Groovy.
> > A
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 5:28 PM Paul King wrote:
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I plan to do a beta-2 of 3.0.0 in a few weeks and then hopefully we'll start
> the ramp down to final with one or more RCs. When we get to the RCs stage,
> I'll make a 3_0_X branch. At this stage I don't foresee a 3.1 versio
Congrats Daniel! Well deserved!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 5:14 PM MG wrote:
>
> Congratulations also from me, Daniel G-)
>
> On 06/05/2019 14:35, Daniel.Sun wrote:
> > Thanks for your kind words :-)
> > I believe Groovy will be groovier and groovier because of our endless
> > efforts
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 12:25 AM Daniel.Sun wrote:
> > I was interested in a statement on the first page that would entice me to
> contribute.
>
> You mean the first page is groovy-lang.org ?
>
That would be nice, but at least on the Open Collective landing page.
Thanks,
Roman.
True, but this is a post-factum view. I was interested in a statement on
the first page that would entice me to contribute.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:33 PM Daniel.Sun wrote:
> The opencollective site will record all "contribute" and "submit
> expense", which is open to all people,
or something.
Then in
the short blurb you disclaim the relationship even further.
That's the ASF side.
On a side of somebody who may consider donating -- I'd also like to see a
clearly
articulated statement of how the money received will be spent.
Thanks,
Roman.
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 a
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 5:48 AM Jennifer Strater
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Was there a response from the Apache foundation? And as always, just let
> me know if I can help.
>
What kind of a response are you looking for?
Thanks,
Roman.
>
> Best,
> Jenn
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 10:35 AM Mar
Speaking of 3.0.0 what's a general feel on when can we see it turning beta?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 6:41 AM Daniel.Sun wrote:
>
> 2.5.3 supports Java11 and is released.
> 3.0.0 alpha-4 supports Java11 too but not released yet.
>
> P.S. 2.6 is not maintained anymore.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>From the peanut gallery (top posting as we do here on peanut gallery ;-))
This is a GREAT list of things to do in Groovy 3.0!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Jesper Steen Møller
wrote:
> Groovy 3.0 Scope (suggestion)
>
> TL;DR: I want to help develop Groovy 3.0, but I'm not sur
Yup. I'm following up with the INFRA. It seems that the canonical
repos are not affected tho:
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/
Thanks,
Roman.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Guillaume Laforge wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Looking at other apache/* repositories, it seems we're not the sole o
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Paul King wrote:
> Dear community,
>
> I am happy to start the VOTE thread for a Groovy 2.4.10 release!
>
> This release includes 9 bug fixes/improvements as outlined in the changelog:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318123&versi
Well, for better of for worse this is the Groovy behavior as of today
(sorry for quoting myself -- but the thread there is interesting):
https://twitter.com/rhatr/status/824033519684829185
Personally I find it surprising.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Mauro Zallocco wrot
+1
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Mario Garcia wrote:
> +1 if follows the convention mentioned by Andres
>
> On 25 Jan 2017 17:58, "Andres Almiray" wrote:
>>
>> Is the "implies" method supposed to work with Groovy Truth or with
>> booleans only?
>> If the former then this would pose a problem
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Cédric Champeau
wrote:
> My take is simpler than this. If Parrot should be included in 2.5, then
> remove the old parser and use it. If it's for 3.0, then it should not belong
> to the 2.5 beta, or it should be an external dependency (possibly tested by
> adding a
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Paul King wrote:
> I am thinking we should do a 2.5.0-beta-1 release and possibly a 2.4.9
> in a couple of weeks time. For 2.5.0-beta-1, it would be nice to have
> the groovy macro PR reviewed and added (I know several of us have a
> review on our TODO lists) but I
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Paul King wrote:
> Looks like everyone is keen to get the release out soon. Given it was
> just a minor tweak to the build file, I'll re-issue the vote but with
> a 48 hr window.
+1
Thanks,
Roman.
Hi!
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Clark Richey wrote:
> I have very successfully used spring test controllers with swagger. This
> article explains the dependencies.
> http://www.3pillarglobal.com/insights/restful-api-documentation-using-swagger-and-spring-mvc
Perhaps I should've elaborated i
Hi!
I was wondering if there are any bindings available
for Groovy when it comes to creating REST APIs
with Swagger.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Roman.
Welcome Sergei -- great to have you part of the Apache Groovy club!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Sergei Egorov wrote:
> Hi, the Apache Groovy people!
>
> I'm excited to join the team! Big thanks to PMC for this opportunity.
>
> I wrote my first Groovy code 3.5 years ago :) Was
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Johannes Link wrote:
> Using an annotation seems like a hackish way. I'd rather go with an extended
> version of switch or even better a native matching parameter syntax. Just my
> 2 cents.
Same here: I feel like relying on annotations too much tends to create a v
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Henrik Martin wrote:
> -1. I never knew I was missing those operators. I think there's a huge
> benefit to having a clean syntax.
> +1 for !in and !instanceof though.
Same here!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Daniel Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Marcin Erdmann proposed the new operator ?=, e.g. a ?= "foo" is
> equivalent of a = a ?: "foo".
>
> I like his idea, what do you think about it?
Like it! I could definitely see myself using it.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Jesper Steen Møller
wrote:
> "Real lambdas" with the full invokedynamic treatment is a big job, and
> requires static type inference.
> Given that Groovy can already coerce closures into functional interfaces
> (dynamically), we could implement the whole metafactor
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Cédric Champeau
wrote:
>
>
> 2016-07-08 9:10 GMT+02:00 Jochen Theodorou :
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07.07.2016 17:25, Cédric Champeau wrote:
>>>
>>> Gradle 3.0 will require JDK 7. Gradle 2.x can run on JDK 6. I'm not a
>>> big fan of "backporting". To me it's easier to comple
like my go-to IDE InteliJ is broken in that regard. Any suggestions
on what may work?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> On 02.07.2016 09:06, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> I'd really appreciate if somebody can explain what the
Hi!
while working with Gradle I've come across a behavior
that I find impossible to explain. Basically, how is it possible
for 'exec' in the first line to resolve and the one in println
line not to?
I'd really appreciate if somebody can explain what the first
exec resolves to and why:
$ cat buil
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I know I can close a github pull request using a commit message, and I know
> we cannot do it using the UI (as long as I am not the author of the request
> at least), because it is a read-only mirror. But is there really no oth
I will definitely be voting for a release called mushroom ;-)
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Nicholas Grealy wrote:
> +1 for mushroom :-)
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 04:18 Guillaume Laforge wrote:
>>
>> Let's go with mushroom, for a change :-)
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Cédric Champe
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 4:49 AM, Paul King wrote:
> I think it would be good to have some kind of minimal roadmap in the
> new documentation to replace the old page but I agree as others have
> said that there is no point in having unrealistic goals - so something
> quite small is what I think we
scal
>
>
> Am 07.01.2016 um 04:58 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik:
>>
>> Apparently the instructions have changed :-(
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/README_NEWTLP
>>
>> On top of which the new ones don't quite work for me
o add a note that groovy graduated, but I do not have commit rights
> to the incubator page, anymore.
>
>
> Am 07.12.2015 um 21:34 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Pascal Schumacher
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello everybody,
&
completed yet?
>
> Cheers,
> Pascal
>
>
> Am 23.12.2015 um 23:34 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik:
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Pascal Schumacher
> wrote:
>
> Hi Roman,
>
> thanks for creating the file. I merged the pull request.
>
> Great!
>
> I guess
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Pascal Schumacher
wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
> thanks for creating the file. I merged the pull request.
Great!
> I guess this:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=groovy.git;f=DOAP.rdf;a=blob_plain;hb=HEAD
>
> should be added to files.xml according to
> http:
Hi!
as was noticed by Kane, Groovy is currently
missing from http://www.apache.org. This
is because we haven't published our DOAP
file yet:
http://projects-old.apache.org/create.html
Here's my take on DOAP:
https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/223
Please comment.
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. K
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Pascal Schumacher
wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> is there some "official" statement that groovy is now a top level project?
Well there are board meeting notes ratifying the decision. That's
as official as it gets. If what you mean is PR -- I don't think we've
done
36 matches
Mail list logo
