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-scxml-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
+1
-Rahul
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Niall Pemberton
wrote:
> I have prepared Commons IO 2.0 RC5. The main changes since RC4 was to
> rename the FilesystemObserver/Monitor to
> FileAlterationObserver/Monitor and improvements to the test coverage.
>
> The RC3 changes were improvements to s
yes, understood and agreed.
BTW I still find redundant that the same field, used with the same
semantic, is present in Config,Pool and Factory, my proposal was about
keeping the Config only - immutable fields can be declared there - and
remove config parameters from Factory/Pool, that will require
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Siegfried Goeschl
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I would like to call a vote for releasing commons-exec-1.1 based on RC1.
>
> [X] +1 release it
> [ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
> [ ] -1 no, do not release it because
-Rahul
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-dbcp has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
On 15 October 2010 17:01, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> there are Generic(Keyed)ObjectPool(Factory) that (in pairs, Pool and
> related factory) share the same kind of information, replicated in the
> related Config class.
>
> I wonder if we can improve that design and remove that informat
On 15 October 2010 21:13, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:35 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 15 October 2010 03:14, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>> I have prepared Commons IO 2.0 RC5. The main changes since RC4 was to
>>> rename the FilesystemObserver/Monitor to
>>> FileAlterationObserver/Mo
+1 Looks good to me - tested using JDK 1.3-1.6 (via maven profiles)
Niall
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 8:40 PM, Siegfried Goeschl
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I would like to call a vote for releasing commons-exec-1.1 based on RC1.
> Below you find the RC coordinates
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
>
I didn't say it was required. I said it was a good idea, because it
would keep things consistent.
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> Changing the artifactId is not necessary. At least if we predict that we
> will not change the groupId again. In Maven the combination of gr
Changing the artifactId is not necessary. At least if we predict that we
will not change the groupId again. In Maven the combination of groupId,
artifactId and version is unique. So org.apache.commons:commons-pool:2.0
and org.apache.commons:commons-pool:3.0 are two unique artifacts.
On 2010-10-15
It's +1 (binding) from me (unless Niall want to document the findbugs issues in
the readme or someplace else.)
Gary Gregory
Senior Software Engineer
Rocket Software
3340 Peachtree Road, Suite 820 . Atlanta, GA 30326 . USA
Tel: +1.404.760.1560
Email: ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com
Web: seagull.rocke
Thank you for your analysis and archeology Niall.
Can we save this information in the readme? Or in perhaps a better place would
be in comments in a findbugs-exclude-filter.xml?
Gary Gregory
Senior Software Engineer
Rocket Software
3340 Peachtree Road, Suite 820 . Atlanta, GA 30326 . USA
Tel: +1
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:35 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 15 October 2010 03:14, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> I have prepared Commons IO 2.0 RC5. The main changes since RC4 was to
>> rename the FilesystemObserver/Monitor to
>> FileAlterationObserver/Monitor and improvements to the test coverage.
>>
>> The R
Sebb has previously raised issues highlighted by FindBugs and I ran it
before cutting RC5. We have resolved a number of FindBugs issues in
this release (Commons IO 1.4 flagged 13 issues and 2.0-RC5 has 9),
some of them are not issues and the rest we decided not to resolve. Of
the 9 FindBugs issues
If we do change the package name to pool2, then I'd suggest the
artifact id change too so that everything stays consistent. So, the
new artifact id would be commons-pool2 rather than commons-pool.
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:40 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> If you change the group id, it's probably be
If you change the group id, it's probably best to go ahead and change
the package names also, in case two versions show up on the same
classpath. Maven won't know that org.apache.commons:common-pool is
the same as commons-pool:commons-pool, so it would potentially put
both on the classpath. I bel
+1 for 2.0. We should also talk about the ugliness that we should probably
also do for 2.0: o.a.c.pool2 or somesuch.
On Oct 15, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all mates,
> is this the right time to move the pool grouId to org.apache.commons?
> Many thanks in advance,
> Simo
>
Hi All:
I downloaded and tested building on Oracle Java 1.6.0_21 64 bit on Windows
Vista 64 bit with Ant 1.8.1 and Maven 2.2.1. All is well with the build and
unit tests.
Findbugs is not part of the build, so I added it and I have some questions:
(1) doCopyDirectory and another methods that ca
Yes! :-)
--Brian (mobile)
On Oct 15, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all mates,
> is this the right time to move the pool grouId to org.apache.commons?
> Many thanks in advance,
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---
Hi all guys,
there are Generic(Keyed)ObjectPool(Factory) that (in pairs, Pool and
related factory) share the same kind of information, replicated in the
related Config class.
I wonder if we can improve that design and remove that information
redundancy: I propose to keep the Config classes only, p
Hi all mates,
is this the right time to move the pool grouId to org.apache.commons?
Many thanks in advance,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.ap
As usual forgetting my own vote
+1
Siegfried Goeschl
On 10/10/10 9:40 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like to call a vote for releasing commons-exec-1.1 based on RC1.
Below you find the RC coordinates
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/
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-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
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
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-scxml-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
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-dbcp has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
On 15 October 2010 03:14, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> I have prepared Commons IO 2.0 RC5. The main changes since RC4 was to
> rename the FilesystemObserver/Monitor to
> FileAlterationObserver/Monitor and improvements to the test coverage.
>
> The RC3 changes were improvements to some tests which were
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi Niall,
> should the clirr report link located on
> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/io-2.0-rc5/site/clirr-report.html
> instead of http://people.apache.org/~niallp/io-2.0-rc4/site/clirr-report.html?
Yes, sorry, my mistake.
> I can't sp
Hi Niall,
should the clirr report link located on
http://people.apache.org/~niallp/io-2.0-rc5/site/clirr-report.html
instead of http://people.apache.org/~niallp/io-2.0-rc4/site/clirr-report.html?
I can't speak about the implementation stuff because my knowledge on
IO is not good enough, but releas
29 matches
Mail list logo
