Re: [Graph] Missing algorithms

2013-05-30 Thread Bruno P. Kinoshita
Hi Oliver! Kudos for the detailed information regarding the missing algorithms in commons-graph. I've a friend who contributes to some OSS projects and is also interested in graphs. He's willing to contribute to commons-graph too. Do you know if there's any algorithm that would be easier to im

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Parent 30-RC1

2013-05-30 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
+1 Thanks, Gary! On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hello All, > > This is a VOTE to release Commons Parent 30-RC1. > > The main changes in this release are RAT configuration changes: > - updated excludes: added .pmd and download_*.cgi > - changed excludes so child POM ex

Re: [dbcp] update DBCP2 to require JDBC 4.1 (Java 7) WAS svn commit: r1431496 - in /commons/proper/dbcp/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/cpdsadapter/ src/

2013-05-30 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 30/05/2013 11:40, Phil Steitz a écrit : > Sorry for stupidity above. I was not thinking through the > consequences of the gump-esque build process. I guess if we really > want to support everything building from source with no binary > incompatible change, we are going to have to support the

Re: [dbcp] update DBCP2 to require JDBC 4.1 (Java 7) WAS svn commit: r1431496 - in /commons/proper/dbcp/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/cpdsadapter/ src/

2013-05-30 Thread Phil Steitz
On 5/30/13 1:47 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 30/05/2013 06:12, Phil Steitz a écrit : > >> Only because we have not yet released 2.0. If we focus on doing >> that, their problem is solved. That was basically my point above. > Let's suppose we release a binary incompatible 2.0 version that compi

Re: [dbcp] update DBCP2 to require JDBC 4.1 (Java 7) WAS svn commit: r1431496 - in /commons/proper/dbcp/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/ src/java/org/apache/commons/dbcp2/cpdsadapter/ src/

2013-05-30 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 30/05/2013 06:12, Phil Steitz a écrit : > Only because we have not yet released 2.0. If we focus on doing > that, their problem is solved. That was basically my point above. Let's suppose we release a binary incompatible 2.0 version that compiles with Java 7, the Debian/Fedora maintainers w