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

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: [codec] Large test data set!

> -Original Message- > From: Oliver Heger [mailto:oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de] > Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 15:19 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! > > Am 25.01.2011 21:01, schrieb Gary Gregory: > > Hi All: > > > > I just found a data set that

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

Am 25.01.2011 21:01, schrieb Gary Gregory: Hi All: I just found a data set that I would like to integrate with [codec] to test the language package: http://sourceforge.net/projects/familynamephon/ The test data file contains 837K German names (37MB) in a text file and encodings in Cham (?) p

[codec] Large test data set!

Hi All: I just found a data set that I would like to integrate with [codec] to test the language package: http://sourceforge.net/projects/familynamephon/ The test data file contains 837K German names (37MB) in a text file and encodings in Cham (?) phonetics, Cologne phonetics, Metaphone, and S

Re: [configuration] Feature request key name variable interpolation

On 01/22/2011 08:31 AM, Oliver Heger wrote: Hello Mike, Am 21.01.2011 06:48, schrieb Mike Power: Consider the following code: public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { Configuration conf = new BaseConfiguration(); conf.setProperty("interpolationdone", "true"); conf.setPrope

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:25 PM, wrote: > Hi Gilles, > > - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : > >> > >> >> >> 1) s/2.2/3.0  s/3.0/4.0 >> > >> >> >> 2) abandon 2.2 release >> > >> > >> > >> > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's >> remember that, >> > >> > at the release of

Re: [Math] FastMath Performance

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, luc.maison...@free.fr wrote: Hi Gilles, - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : Hello. [...] 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 "StrictMath is

[math] requesting a GIT mirror ?

Hello all, I would like to open an INFRA issue requesting a GIT mirror for Commons Math, as proposed in . Do anybody have a comment about this ? Luc - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-u

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

Hi Gilles, - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : > > >> >> >> 1) s/2.2/3.0  s/3.0/4.0 > > >> >> >> 2) abandon 2.2 release > > >> > > > >> > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's > remember that, > > >> > at the release of 3.0, we should immediately create a > "bug-fix-only" br

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

> >> >> >> 1) s/2.2/3.0  s/3.0/4.0 > >> >> >> 2) abandon 2.2 release > >> > > >> > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember > >> > that, > >> > at the release of 3.0, we should immediately create a "bug-fix-only" > >> > branch > >> > (destined to remain backward compa

Re: [Math] FastMath Performance

Hi Gilles, - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : > Hello. > > > > [...] > > >> 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 "StrictMath > > > is expected to be slow(er)

Re: [Math] FastMath Performance

Hello. > > [...] > >> 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 > > "StrictMath > > is expected to be slow(er). [That's why I've added the calls to "Math" in > > th

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Phil, > >> >> >> 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 >> > >> > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember that,

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

Phil, > >> >> 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 > > > > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember that, > > at the release of 3.0, we should immediately create a "bug-fix

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hi. > >> >> 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 > > From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember that, > at the release of

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

Hi. > >> 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 >From the fact that you have to consider these options, let's remember that, at the release of 3.0, we should immediately create a "bug-fix-only" branch (destined

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:01 AM, wrote: > > - "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 >> >>

Re: [math] 2.2 compatibility issues

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:04 AM, wrote: > > - "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 an

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

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

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

Re: Concerning building and updating code from the repository

On 24/01/2011 22:15, Michael Giannakopoulos wrote: > 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

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

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

[math] Re: Concerning building and updating code from the repository

- "Michael Giannakopoulos" a écrit : > Hello guys, Hi Michael, First, please add a [math] marker when you post on this shared list. > 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

Re: [VOTE] Release commons-parent 18

- "Gary Gregory" a écrit : > This is a VOTE to release commons-parent 18. > > [ ] +1: Yes +1 Luc > [ ] -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 compatibili