Re: svn commit: r897257 - in /commons/proper/jexl/trunk: pom.xml src/test/java/org/apache/commons/jexl2/ParseFailuresTest.java

On 08/01/2010, hen...@apache.org wrote: > Author: henrib > Date: Fri Jan 8 16:42:28 2010 > New Revision: 897257 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=897257&view=rev > Log: > pom.xml BSF dependency changed to 'provided' (need it for compile & test & > runtime in Java 5, useless in Java

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Commons - Commons DBCP -

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=266696&projectId=22 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 13:20:58 -0800 Finished at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 13:22:52 -0800 Total time: 1m 53s Build Trigger: Schedule B

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Commons - Commons DBCP -

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=27&projectId=22 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 11:07:51 -0800 Finished at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 11:09:50 -0800 Total time: 1m 58s Build Trigger: Schedule B

Re: [IO] DirectoryWalker Collection parameter types

On 08/01/2010, sebb wrote: > On 08/01/2010, Niall Pemberton wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 9:51 PM, sebb wrote: > > > The overridable methods in DirectoryWalker currently use Collection > > > as a parameter type. > > > > > > As far as I can tell, the Collections need to contain File

[continuum] BUILD SUCCESSFUL: Commons - Commons IO -

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=266653&projectId=155 Build statistics: State: Ok Previous State: Failed Started at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 10:20:02 -0800 Finished at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 10:24:58 -0800 Total time: 4m 55s Build Trigger: Schedule Buil

Re: [IO] DirectoryWalker Collection parameter types

On 08/01/2010, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 9:51 PM, sebb wrote: > > The overridable methods in DirectoryWalker currently use Collection > > as a parameter type. > > > > As far as I can tell, the Collections need to contain File objects, so > > would it not be better to us

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Commons - Commons DBCP -

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=266629&projectId=22 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Ok Started at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 08:39:29 -0800 Finished at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 08:41:07 -0800 Total time: 1m 37s Build Trigger: Forced Build N

Re: [IO] OK to drop Maven1 build files?

sebb wrote: > Is it OK to delete the Maven1 build files from IO? The code now > requires Java 1.5. +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [IO] DirectoryWalker Collection parameter types

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 9:51 PM, sebb wrote: > The overridable methods in DirectoryWalker currently use Collection > as a parameter type. > > As far as I can tell, the Collections need to contain File objects, so > would it not be better to use Collection? > > Might be nice to use Collection, but w

Re: [IO] OK to drop Maven1 build files?

+1 Niall On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:45 AM, sebb wrote: > Is it OK to delete the Maven1 build files from IO? The code now > requires Java 1.5. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional comm

Re: New sandbox component: at-digester

Hi Henry, thanks a lot for your hint!!! Since I already created (and started committing code) on the sandbox on https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/at-digester/trunk Can I branch the code here? Should I remove the existing stuff on the target dir? Many thanks in advance, I'm sorry bu

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Commons - Commons DBCP - Java 5 - Ant 1.7.0 Java 5

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=266579&projectId=2619 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 05:31:13 -0800 Finished at: Wed 6 Jan 2010 05:32:21 -0800 Total time: 1m 8s Build Trigger: Schedule