Le 12/11/2010 01:20, er...@apache.org a écrit :
> Author: erans
> Date: Fri Nov 12 00:20:21 2010
> New Revision: 1034222
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1034222&view=rev
> Log:
> MATH-438
> Removed deprecated class.
>
> Removed:
>
> commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java/org/apach
I usually change the Java source code to a small italic font so the
parsing will go faster.
-Adrian
On 11/11/2010 3:09 PM, sebb wrote:
I've been testing the NET build, and find that the javadoc phases take
ages - 5 or 6 minutes each for main and test.
Is this normal, or is there something I c
I've been testing the NET build, and find that the javadoc phases take
ages - 5 or 6 minutes each for main and test.
Is this normal, or is there something I can do to speed it up?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=1541&projectId=107
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Thu 11 Nov 2010 20:23:15 +
Finished at: Thu 11 Nov 2010 20:29:54 +
Total time: 6m 38s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Buil
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-jelly-tags-quartz has an issue affecting its community
integratio
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
On 11 November 2010 05:33, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 10, 2010, at 2:07 PM, Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Luc.
>>
Do we need a "task" issue in order to delete all code deprecated in 2.2 and
before?
>>>
>>> I think we need several different issues, depending on broad topics