[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-collections4 (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-24 Thread Gump
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-collections4 has an issue affecting its community integration. Thi

Re: svn commit: r1062330 - in /commons/proper/codec/trunk/src: java/org/apache/commons/codec/binary/Base64.java test/org/apache/commons/codec/binary/Base64Test.java

2011-01-24 Thread Julius Davies
Fixed now, thanks for pointing this out Oops! On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 5:19 AM, sebb wrote: > On 23 January 2011 05:52,   wrote: >> Author: julius >> Date: Sun Jan 23 05:52:42 2011 >> New Revision: 1062330 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1062330&view=rev >> Log: >> CODEC-99 - Bas

Re: [Math] Explanations for MATH-459

2011-01-24 Thread Michael Giannakopoulos
Hello guys, I'm facing a small problem here... I use eclipse in order to see the version of the current code from the repository [Apache Commons Math code](via svn...). I download all all the files in the repository and i create a new java project in eclipse... The problem is that i cannot merge al

Re: Concerning building and updating code from the repository

2011-01-24 Thread Michael Giannakopoulos
P.S. My bad... 'current code from the repository' is referred to Apache Commons Math current code and repository...

Concerning building and updating code from the repository

2011-01-24 Thread Michael Giannakopoulos
Hello guys, I'm facing a small problem here... I use eclipse in order to see the version of the current code from the repository (via svn...). I download all all the files in the repository and i create a new java project in eclipse... The problem is that i cannot merge all the source files with th

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 18

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
There was another change: Updated maven-assembly-plugin: 2.2-beta-5 => 2.2 Seems OK to me. +1 to release On 24 January 2011 21:06, Simone Tripodi wrote: > I'm +1 for these changes, thanks for taking care of it! > Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://www.99soft.org/ > > >

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 18

2011-01-24 Thread Simone Tripodi
I'm +1 for these changes, thanks for taking care of it! Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > My +1 > > Gary > ggreg...@apache.org > ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com > >> -Original Message- >> From: Gary

RE: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 18

2011-01-24 Thread Gary Gregory
My +1 Gary ggreg...@apache.org ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com > -Original Message- > From: Gary Gregory [mailto:ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com] > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 15:20 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 18 > > This is a VOTE to release commo

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Simone Tripodi
Hi all guys, since it seems there are no objections, I would proceeding on creating the sandbox. How should it be called? Digester3? how does it sounds DigesterNG? :) Just let me know, have a nice day! Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at

[VOTE] Release commons-parent 18

2011-01-24 Thread Gary Gregory
This is a VOTE to release commons-parent 18. [ ] +1: Yes [ ] -1: No, because: The changes since 17 are: - Update to Surefire 2.7.1 (from the 2.5 default and 2.2 for the Java 1.3 profile.) - Update plugins for Maven 3 compatibility: - maven-site-plugin 2.0.1 -> 2.2 - maven-project-info-rep

Re: [MATH] FastMath evaluation discrepancies

2011-01-24 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Hi Sebb, Le 24/01/2011 18:59, sebb a écrit : > I've now fixed the reflection-based tests. Great. I didn't knew about this way to use junit. > > Rather than ignoring results which are within one ULP of the expected > value, these are treated as errors at present. > If double or float numbers dif

Re: [MATH] FastMath evaluation discrepancies

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
On 24 January 2011 17:59, sebb wrote: > I've now fixed the reflection-based tests. > > Rather than ignoring results which are within one ULP of the expected > value, these are treated as errors at present. > If double or float numbers differ, these are now shown in hex, rather > than floating-poin

[MATH] FastMath evaluation discrepancies

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
I've now fixed the reflection-based tests. Rather than ignoring results which are within one ULP of the expected value, these are treated as errors at present. If double or float numbers differ, these are now shown in hex, rather than floating-point as many of the routines use bit operations anywa

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Simone Tripodi
Thanks a lot guys, I really appreciate your support, help/suggestions come always in a kind and friendly way :) Have a nice day, Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Simone

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Rahul Akolkar
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi Matt!!! > I always appreciate a feedback from you! I just implemented a spike on > my local workspace so I still don't have idea if the API beakage will > be so deep, I'll wait for more feedbacks before creating the sandbox, > to see if

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Rahul Akolkar
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Matt Benson wrote: > Speaking as a non-user of Digester, it would seem that as long as a new > version can process the same XML configs, and retains the ability to plug > in/adapt extensions written against v2, breakage of other APIs (which should > be minimal

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Simone Tripodi
Hi Matt!!! I always appreciate a feedback from you! I just implemented a spike on my local workspace so I still don't have idea if the API beakage will be so deep, I'll wait for more feedbacks before creating the sandbox, to see if there are objections. BTW thanks a lot for your thoughts and contri

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Matt Benson
Speaking as a non-user of Digester, it would seem that as long as a new version can process the same XML configs, and retains the ability to plug in/adapt extensions written against v2, breakage of other APIs (which should be minimal in such a library) isn't terribly important. Again, this is s

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread luc . maisonobe
- "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > I guess there are some other logical alternatives to consider: > > 1) s/2.2/3.0 s/3.0/4.0 > 2) abandon 2.2 release > > Option 1) may not be that bad - saves work reverting the incompatible > stuff remaining and solves Luc's (and anyone else who has been using >

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread luc . maisonobe
- "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:58 AM, wrote: > > > > - "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > > > >> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Phil Steitz > > >> wrote: > >> > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Phil Steitz > > >> wrote: > >> >> The clirr report run from the current M

Re: [MATH] FastMath bug fixes - should they be in changes.xml?

2011-01-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 8:30 AM, sebb wrote: >> On 24 January 2011 13:01,   wrote: >>> Hi Sebb, >>> >>> - "sebb" a écrit : >>> Just had a sudden thought - FastMath is new to 2.2 and 3.0, so does it make sense to list all it

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread Phil Steitz
I guess there are some other logical alternatives to consider: 1) s/2.2/3.0 s/3.0/4.0 2) abandon 2.2 release Option 1) may not be that bad - saves work reverting the incompatible stuff remaining and solves Luc's (and anyone else who has been using trunk/2_X) problem and also keeps us consistent

Re: [MATH] FastMath bug fixes - should they be in changes.xml?

2011-01-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 8:30 AM, sebb wrote: > On 24 January 2011 13:01,   wrote: >> Hi Sebb, >> >> - "sebb" a écrit : >> >>> Just had a sudden thought - FastMath is new to 2.2 and 3.0, so does >>> it >>> make sense to list all its bug fixes in the changes document? >> >> As long as their are

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:58 AM, wrote: > > - "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > >> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Phil Steitz >> wrote: >> > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Phil Steitz >> wrote: >> >> The clirr report run from the current MATH_2_X branch is, as >> expected, >> >> problematic. 

Re: [Math] FastMathPerformance unit test

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
On 24 January 2011 13:03, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hi. > > I've updated the unit test file "FastMathTestPerformance.java" in > revision 1062761. > If there are no complaints with the new setup, I'll remove the method > "testPerformance" (currently set as "@Ignore"). Yes, separate tests are better

Re: [Math] FastMath Performance (Was: [jira] Resolved: (MATH-493) ...)

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
On 24 January 2011 13:11, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hi. > >> Sebb resolved MATH-493. >> --- >> >>     Resolution: Fixed >> >> Fixed by using the Harmony code. >> >> Note: this appears to be at least as quick as StrictMath on Sun Java 1.6 in >> a crude test > > The performance c

Re: [MATH] FastMath bug fixes - should they be in changes.xml?

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
On 24 January 2011 13:01, wrote: > Hi Sebb, > > - "sebb" a écrit : > >> Just had a sudden thought - FastMath is new to 2.2 and 3.0, so does >> it >> make sense to list all its bug fixes in the changes document? > > As long as their are Jira issues on them, I think they should be referenced.

[Math] FastMath Performance (Was: [jira] Resolved: (MATH-493) ...)

2011-01-24 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hi. > Sebb resolved MATH-493. > --- > > Resolution: Fixed > > Fixed by using the Harmony code. > > Note: this appears to be at least as quick as StrictMath on Sun Java 1.6 in a > crude test The performance comparison for "FastMath" should be against "Math", as "Strict

[Math] FastMathPerformance unit test

2011-01-24 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hi. I've updated the unit test file "FastMathTestPerformance.java" in revision 1062761. If there are no complaints with the new setup, I'll remove the method "testPerformance" (currently set as "@Ignore"). Best, Gilles - To uns

Re: [MATH] FastMath bug fixes - should they be in changes.xml?

2011-01-24 Thread luc . maisonobe
Hi Sebb, - "sebb" a écrit : > Just had a sudden thought - FastMath is new to 2.2 and 3.0, so does > it > make sense to list all its bug fixes in the changes document? As long as their are Jira issues on them, I think they should be referenced. Luc > > [If we do list them, I think they sh

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread luc . maisonobe
- "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Phil Steitz > wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Phil Steitz > wrote: > >> The clirr report run from the current MATH_2_X branch is, as > expected, > >> problematic.  To get 2.2. out, we need to agree on what breaks we >

[MATH] FastMath bug fixes - should they be in changes.xml?

2011-01-24 Thread sebb
Just had a sudden thought - FastMath is new to 2.2 and 3.0, so does it make sense to list all its bug fixes in the changes document? [If we do list them, I think they should be numerically ordered] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-u

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

2011-01-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> The clirr report run from the current MATH_2_X branch is, as expected, >> problematic.  To get 2.2. out, we need to agree on what breaks we are going >> to allow and what we are going to f

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-proxy-test (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-24 Thread Gump
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

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-jelly-tags-quartz (in module commons-jelly) failed

2011-01-24 Thread Gump
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

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-configuration (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-24 Thread Gump
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 has an issue affecting its community integration. Th

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-scxml-test (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-24 Thread Gump
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

Re: [vote][sandbox] Proposal for Digester3 sandbox

2011-01-24 Thread Simone Tripodi
That's very good Rahul, being yourself also a Digester users, it should be easier for me having you to give a guideline :) Have a nice day! Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:08 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 9:47