I disagree on your doubt, but have other doubts. Think of this issue
as a TODO in the code (I think it came from a TODO file a long time
back). I think it's doable with a StrMatcher change - moving it back
to 3.0 because while it shouldn't break the StrTokenizer API, it will
need to break the StrMa
Hi
Can any body clarify my doubt on issue LANG-288; I have added my comments in
it.
Thanks
Chandrashekar
Cool! Thanks Mladen!
-Jack
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> On 02/05/2010 07:36 AM, Jack Cai wrote:
>
>> Are we making any progress with the new Daemon release?
>>
>>
> Yes :)
> It took a little longer then expected. Next week.
>
> Cheers
> --
> ^TM
>
>
> ---
Here is my +1
Phil
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
sebb wrote:
> On 07/02/2010, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Having corrected the problems identified with RC6 (unit test timing
>> errors, unnecessary trivial object caches, unnecessary mutability in
>> CPDS factories, incomplete fix for DBCP-8), I would like to move
>> forward with the release of DBCP
On 07/02/2010, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Having corrected the problems identified with RC6 (unit test timing
> errors, unnecessary trivial object caches, unnecessary mutability in
> CPDS factories, incomplete fix for DBCP-8), I would like to move
> forward with the release of DBCP 1.3/1.4.
>
> As p
Having corrected the problems identified with RC6 (unit test timing
errors, unnecessary trivial object caches, unnecessary mutability in
CPDS factories, incomplete fix for DBCP-8), I would like to move
forward with the release of DBCP 1.3/1.4.
As previously discussed, the only difference between
1
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-jexl has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
