Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

Hi Hen, Henri Yandell wrote at Freitag, 18. September 2009 07:20: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Stefan Bodewig > wrote: >> On 2009-09-17, Henri Yandell wrote: >> >>> Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get >>> worse until they set up a separate v3 version any

Re: [VOTE] Release Pool 1.5.3

+1. Keys good. Sigs good. Manifest looks good on jar. Javadoc has correct version. NOTICE good. LICENSE good. RELEASE NOTES good (matches JIRA). Source unpacks happily and builds a jar without problem. And agreed that this issue is worth doing a release for. Hen On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:34 PM,

Re: Reminder: commons-collections integrated into OpenSolaris

Hi James, If you could open a JIRA item up at http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS - then it won't get forgotten. Currently the focus is on having just merged in a divergent branch and shifting gears from working on 3.3 to 4.0. Thanks for putting Collections in Solaris. Is there anyth

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2009-09-17, Henri Yandell wrote: > >> Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get >> worse until they set up a separate v3 version anyway. Which I think is >> what's happened for Lang. > > Yes this is what we d

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2009-09-18, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >> On 2009-09-17, Henri Yandell wrote: > >>> Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get >>> worse until they set up a separate v3 version anyway. Which I think is >>> what'

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

On 2009-09-18, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2009-09-17, Henri Yandell wrote: >> Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get >> worse until they set up a separate v3 version anyway. Which I think is >> what's happened for Lang. > Yes this is what we did - and likely wil

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

On 2009-09-17, Henri Yandell wrote: > Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get > worse until they set up a separate v3 version anyway. Which I think is > what's happened for Lang. Yes this is what we did - and likely will do for collections. So the answer to my ini

[VOTE] Release Pool 1.5.3

The distribution artifacts are here: http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool-1.5.3-RC1/ The maven artifacts are here: http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool-1.5.3-RC1/maven/ Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (21-Sept 01:45:00 GMT) [ ] +1 [ ] +0 [ ] -0 [ ] -1 Thanks! Phil ---

Reminder: commons-collections integrated into OpenSolaris

Do somebody can help to add the link to the commons project download page, or give me a suggestion where should I submit this request. Thanks! Or do I need supply more information about this? Best Regards! -James Jin James Wan wrote: I have integrated commons-collections version 3.2.1 into So

Re: [POOL] Timing of a 1.5.3 release?

On Sep 17, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: Mark Thomas wrote: POOL-149 impacts Grails badly. The Grails project is aiming to release Grails 1.2 soon and they need a 1.5.3 release or they'll have to drop back to 1.4.x I'd really like to see Grails using pool 1.5.x as it offers a good op

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

Hi Mat, Matt Benson wrote: > This probably just exemplifies why we need to change the package name. not necessarily. As long as that what's in collections-3 is binary compatible with collections 2.x we can have it this way. However, we can add a collection-legacy-3 for that stuff that has been r

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-primitives (in module apache-commons) failed

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-primitives has an issue affecting its community integration. This

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

Though it wouldn't make Gump's life any easier. In fact life would get worse until they set up a separate v3 version anyway. Which I think is what's happened for Lang. On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Matt Benson wrote: > This probably just exemplifies why we need to change the package name. > >

Re: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

This probably just exemplifies why we need to change the package name. --- On Thu, 9/17/09, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > From: Stefan Bodewig > Subject: [COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes? > To: dev@commons.apache.org > Date: Thursday, September 17, 2009, 2:42 AM > Hi all, > > as expected, Gump fo

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-jelly (in module commons-jelly) failed

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-jelly has an issue affecting its community integration. This issue

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-jelly-test (in module commons-jelly) failed

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-jelly-test has an issue affecting its community integration. This

Re: [POOL] Timing of a 1.5.3 release?

Phil Steitz wrote: > Mark Thomas wrote: >> POOL-149 impacts Grails badly. The Grails project is aiming to release >> Grails 1.2 soon and they need a 1.5.3 release or they'll have to drop >> back to 1.4.x >> >> I'd really like to see Grails using pool 1.5.x as it offers a good >> opportunity to get

Re: [POOL] Timing of a 1.5.3 release?

Mark Thomas wrote: > POOL-149 impacts Grails badly. The Grails project is aiming to release > Grails 1.2 soon and they need a 1.5.3 release or they'll have to drop > back to 1.4.x > > I'd really like to see Grails using pool 1.5.x as it offers a good > opportunity to get feedback on the new sync c

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-configuration-test (in module apache-commons) failed

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-configuration-test has an issue affecting its community integrati

[POOL] Timing of a 1.5.3 release?

POOL-149 impacts Grails badly. The Grails project is aiming to release Grails 1.2 soon and they need a 1.5.3 release or they'll have to drop back to 1.4.x I'd really like to see Grails using pool 1.5.x as it offers a good opportunity to get feedback on the new sync code in pool. Phil - if memory

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-primitives (in module apache-commons) failed

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-primitives has an issue affecting its community integration. This

[g...@vmgump]: Project commons-graph (in module commons-dormant) failed

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-graph has an issue affecting its community integration. This issue

[COLLECTIONS] Advice on API Changes?

Hi all, as expected, Gump found a few projects that have been broken by the recent merge in Collections - that's what it's there fore anyway. The first ones I have found (there will be more, I'm sure are): Torque: uses FastArrayList and OrderedMap#orderedMapIterator() Jelly: uses BeanMap commons