--- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Matt Benson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Good questions! I suppose that's the thing to
> do,
> > with the understanding that my pushing this makes
> me
> > liable if I don't get off my ass and do what's
> needed
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:46 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Good questions! I suppose that's the thing to do,
> > with the understanding that my pushing this makes me
> > liable if I don't get off my ass
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good questions! I suppose that's the thing to do,
> with the understanding that my pushing this makes me
> liable if I don't get off my ass and do what's needed
> to get that branch releasable, huh?
>
So, how will this w
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In TortoiseSVN, if you have the source and destination folders open
> and right click and drag the file(s)/folder(s) you want to move or
> copy to the target folder it pops up a context menu with several
> move/copy o
On 4/1/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> svn move is "equivalent to an svn copy followed by svn delete." So,
> I'll just delete the one out of dormant.
Yup.
> I usually use TortoiseSVN
> for my SVN stuff (or Intellij IDEA). Tortoise doesn't show a "move"
> command in its menu
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:27 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 4/1/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On 4/1/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It's almost like we need a two-phase commit here. We do some stuff
> > > and then ask everyone "are you okay with that?" What if we staged our
> > > release
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:23 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Niall Pemberton
>
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Niall Pemberton
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:29 AM, James Car
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:29 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Generics may help breathe some new life into commons-functor. Would
> > anyone else be interested in helping me revive it?
>
> I've fixed th
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 4/1/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 4/1/08, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Author: jcarman
> >
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Niall Pemberton
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:29 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Generics may help breathe some new life into commons-fun
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:29 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Generics may help breathe some new life into commons-functor. Would
> > anyone else be interested in helping me revive it?
>
> I've fixed the
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:29 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Generics may help breathe some new life into commons-functor. Would
> anyone else be interested in helping me revive it?
I've fixed the source file headers to comply with current policy and
brought the site up-to-date and
On 4/1/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/1/08, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Author: jcarman
> > > Date: Tue Apr 1 08:09:51 2008
> > > New Revision: 643434
> > >
> > > URL:
On 4/1/08, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just added my ugly mug to the crowdvine site
>
> http://apacheconeu2008.crowdvine.com/
>
OK, I'll try to find you on 4/9. Mines in transit, should show up on
the speaker page at some point.
-Rahul
> Niall
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/1/08, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Author: jcarman
> > Date: Tue Apr 1 08:09:51 2008
> > New Revision: 643434
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=643434&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Reviv
As my CS graduation I wrote a GA framework to help me solve the problem
I was proposing. It is implemented, may need some improvements with a
less naive and optimized code, but it works fine. I wrote less
interfaces but I really liked Brent's initial interface set and seems to
me the idea will
On 4/1/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: skestle
> Date: Tue Apr 1 14:36:59 2008
> New Revision: 643590
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=643590&view=rev
> Log:
> Added Equator interface for COLLECTIONS-242.
>
> Added:
>
> commons/proper/collections/bran
On 4/1/08, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: jcarman
> Date: Tue Apr 1 08:09:51 2008
> New Revision: 643434
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=643434&view=rev
> Log:
> Reviving functor
>
> Added:
> commons/sandbox/functor/
> - copied from r643433, commons/do
On 4/1/08, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Behind again! If Rahul[1] will concede we've
> outstripped the need for a vote, I'm fine...
>
> http://commons.markmail.org/message/2tx3y52r6t474okj
>
:-) Its seems theres abundant interest (ATM).
-Rahul
>
> -Matt
>
>
--
--- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Matt Benson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Guys, I don't care what happens where--we can use
> > trunk for generics work, but I would like the
> option
> > of finishing a non-generic version of the lib
> (branch
> >
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guys, I don't care what happens where--we can use
> trunk for generics work, but I would like the option
> of finishing a non-generic version of the lib (branch
> is fine by me) so we can evaluate the difficulty of
> swapp
--- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, what version would you use for the
> non-genericized functor? 1.0?
> Then, the genericized version should be 2.0 (with
> o.a.c.functor2
> package names)?
Good questions! I suppose that's the thing to do,
with the understanding that my pushing t
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Commons Wiki" for
change notification.
The following page has been changed by Mohammad Nour El Din:
http://wiki.apache.org/commons/Validator
--
'
So, what version would you use for the non-genericized functor? 1.0?
Then, the genericized version should be 2.0 (with o.a.c.functor2
package names)?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guys, I don't care what happens where--we can use
> trunk for generics wo
Guys, I don't care what happens where--we can use
trunk for generics work, but I would like the option
of finishing a non-generic version of the lib (branch
is fine by me) so we can evaluate the difficulty of
swapping it out for the similar parts of a (also
non-generic) Collections 4.0.
-Matt
---
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:06 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd suggest leaving them with the Java files, assuming that they are
> related to each other.
> [JMeter has some beans with related property files; these are easy to
> maintain because the files are all in the same directory. I
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's almost like we need a two-phase commit here. We do some stuff
> > and then ask everyone "are you okay with that?" What if we staged our
> > releases to an SVN working copy? Then, everyone could look at it and
On 01/04/2008, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:13 AM, James Carman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Niall Pemberton
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't think we needed a vote to add a new sandbox component
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=72182&projectId=172
Build statistics:
State: Ok
Previous State: Error
Started at: Tue 1 Apr 2008 09:07:59 -0700
Finished at: Tue 1 Apr 2008 09:08:18 -0700
Total time: 18s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build Number: 4
Glad to see you guys getting off the ground. I also did a bit more looking
around for existing projects with compatible licenses and came across Evolvica
http://evolvica.org/ . I approached Andreas Rummier, its sole author, about
contributing to Commons-Math and got the following encouraging r
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:13 AM, James Carman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Niall Pemberton
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I didn't think we needed a vote to add a new sandbox component - at
> > least not for existing commons committers. I would just go ahea
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:13 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Niall Pemberton
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I didn't think we needed a vote to add a new sandbox component - at
> > least not for existing commons committers. I would just go ahead
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't think we needed a vote to add a new sandbox component - at
> least not for existing commons committers. I would just go ahead and
> do it - which is what I did for the commons-build-plugin
>
Ok, I've copied i
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:02 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Behind again! If Rahul[1] will concede we've
> > outstripped the need for a vote, I'm fine...
> >
> > http://commons.markmail.org/messag
I just added my ugly mug to the crowdvine site
http://apacheconeu2008.crowdvine.com/
Niall
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 8:12 PM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone planning to be at ApacheCon EU 2008?
>
> I'm going to be there - perhaps we could have an informal get together
> if t
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Behind again! If Rahul[1] will concede we've
> outstripped the need for a vote, I'm fine...
>
> http://commons.markmail.org/message/2tx3y52r6t474okj
Well, I was going to just move it, since it was only in the sandbox.
--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Benson schrieb:
> > --- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> So, if we want to revive it, do we start working
> on
> >> it within the
> >> "dormant" folder or should we move it back into
> >> sandbox or proper (I
> >>
Obviously I was a couple of messages behind, but the
last time I brought this up a vote was recommended.
That part stands. :)
-Matt
--- Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So, if we want to revive it, do we start working
> on
> > it wi
Matt Benson schrieb:
> --- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> So, if we want to revive it, do we start working on
>> it within the
>> "dormant" folder or should we move it back into
>> sandbox or proper (I
>> think it was in proper at one time)?
>>
>
> Was it? I'd thought it ha
--- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, if we want to revive it, do we start working on
> it within the
> "dormant" folder or should we move it back into
> sandbox or proper (I
> think it was in proper at one time)?
Was it? I'd thought it hadn't gotten past the
sandbox... Actually, it
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Niall Pemberton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:52 AM, James Carman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, if we want to revive it, do we start working on it within the
> > "dormant" folder or should we move it back into sandbox or proper (I
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:52 AM, James Carman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, if we want to revive it, do we start working on it within the
> "dormant" folder or should we move it back into sandbox or proper (I
> think it was in proper at one time)?
It was in the Sandbox when it moved to dorman
So, if we want to revive it, do we start working on it within the
"dormant" folder or should we move it back into sandbox or proper (I
think it was in proper at one time)?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 6:46 AM, Dave Meikle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would as well.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
> On 01
I would as well.
Regards,
Dave
On 01/04/2008, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would.
>
> -Matt
>
>
> --- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Generics may help breathe some new life into
> > commons-functor. Would
> > anyone else be interested in helping me revive it?
> >
>
45 matches
Mail list logo
