It sounds like the Commons Logging page should include text that refers to
Log4j 2.
Gary
Original message
From: Christian Grobmeier
Date:11/10/2013 15:46 (GMT-05:00)
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [OGNL] Make use of logging?
On 10 Nov 2013, at 21:24, henrib
Great. Thanks, Thomas!
Matt
On Nov 10, 2013 3:14 PM, "Thomas Neidhart"
wrote:
> On 11/10/2013 09:16 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> > Historically we have included these for tools like Apache velocity, but
> > these days velocity no longer needs them. In [functor] we have dropped
> > them, and I sugges
> -Original Message-
> From: Lukasz Lenart
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:08
>
> 2013/11/7 Jason Pyeron :
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Benedikt Ritter
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:00
> >>
> >> Yes, as long as it's Log4j2 ;-)
> >
> > Now I need a sed
Thanks for the reply,
My FTPClient knowledge is obviously a bit lacking as it hadn't really
clicked that FTPClient inherits from SocketClient.
Jake
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Daniel Savarese wrote:
>
> In message <
> cantdsqb3ne5bpshj1u07td0xtoj3sdhw_b3spwe8ef2w9hw...@mail.gmail.com>
>
+1
Cheers
Bruno
- Original Message -
> From: Matt Benson
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2013 6:16 PM
> Subject: [collections] util class constructors
>
> Historically we have included these for tools like Apache velocity, but
> these days velocity no
Clirr does not complain about this change, I guess because pre- and
post- are both unchecked, unadvertised exceptions. Before making
more of these changes, I want to make sure others are OK with this
in a dot release. Users who catch MathIllegalArgumentException will
not be affected by this chang
On 11/10/2013 09:46 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On 10 Nov 2013, at 21:24, henrib wrote:
>
>> Would you share why ? I'm sure it would be beneficial to others
>> (including
>> the commons logging community).
>
> Sorry I was short in my reply because I mentioned this a few times
> already. Didn
Hi Oliver,
The release notes wrt BEANUTILS-379 look good to me
Thanks
Niall
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
> Currently the Clirr report for BeanUtils in comparison with the previous
> version contains some errors. These are related to a change in
> ResultSetIterator (due
Well said Christian.
Gary
Original message
From: Christian Grobmeier
Date:11/10/2013 15:46 (GMT-05:00)
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [OGNL] Make use of logging?
On 10 Nov 2013, at 21:24, henrib wrote:
> Would you share why ? I'm sure it would be beneficial
What about the PMD Report? It is mostly about parantheses. I don't See a
problem here, but better ask first, before we do the first RC.
Benedikt
Send from my mobile device
> Am 07.11.2013 um 07:15 schrieb Gary Gregory :
>
> Release early, release often :)
>
> Original message ---
Hello,
I'm back from a conference week and I hope to find the time to have a look at
trunk this week. I also want to go through jira and do some work on the
tickets. From my perspective this will be the last minor release. So every
feature request should either be resolved or targeted to 2.0 (i
Nice to see this moving forward. What is next? Can we integrate the changes you
made in github into svn?
Benedikt
Send from my mobile device
> Am 10.11.2013 um 19:14 schrieb Thomas Neidhart :
>
>> On 11/09/2013 08:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> I like it pretty much. Good job.
>
> There
On 11/10/2013 09:16 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> Historically we have included these for tools like Apache velocity, but
> these days velocity no longer needs them. In [functor] we have dropped
> them, and I suggest we do the same for collections 4.0.
All the util constructors have been made private,
On 10 Nov 2013, at 21:24, henrib wrote:
Would you share why ? I'm sure it would be beneficial to others
(including
the commons logging community).
Sorry I was short in my reply because I mentioned this a few times
already. Didn't find the mails, so here we go:
As you probably know, I have
Currently the Clirr report for BeanUtils in comparison with the previous
version contains some errors. These are related to a change in
ResultSetIterator (due to adding generics) and to removed classes
related to BEANUTILS-379 [1].
In the release notes I tried to describe the corresponding changes
Would you share why ? I'm sure it would be beneficial to others (including
the commons logging community).
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/OGNL-Make-use-of-logging-tp4653577p4656667.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 10 Nov 2013, at 18:47, Lukasz Lenart wrote:
Ok, so let's leave logging layer for now and we should focus on
preparing the first release
+1, thanks Lukasz!
2013/11/9 Gary Gregory :
Neither does log4j 2 ;)
Original message
From: henrib
Date:11/09/2013 12:23 (GMT-05:0
Historically we have included these for tools like Apache velocity, but
these days velocity no longer needs them. In [functor] we have dropped
them, and I suggest we do the same for collections 4.0.
Matt
On 11/08/2013 10:59 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to call a vote for releasing Commons Collections 4.0 based on RC2.
>
> Changes since RC1:
>
> * release notes are now also included in the binary distribution
> * removed spurious hashCode() method in AbstractPatriciaTrie, th
Hi Paul,
many thanks for your feedback.
Am 10.11.2013 04:28, schrieb Paul Benedict:
> Some feedback:
>
> 1) Classes with HTML formatting problems that are messing up the javadocs.
> They are likely all due to missing end tags:
> * MappedPropertyDescriptor
> * LazyDynaMap
> * LazyDyanClass
> * La
Hi,
I fixed the HTML formatting issues in the javadocs.
Niall
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> Some feedback:
>
> 1) Classes with HTML formatting problems that are messing up the javadocs.
> They are likely all due to missing end tags:
> * MappedPropertyDescriptor
> * L
On 11/09/2013 08:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> I like it pretty much. Good job.
There are still a few minor issues with the pretty printing of source
code and the output of the clirr report.
> Anything which can go back into fluido and gives us the chnace to work
> with the "original fluido
On 11/10/13 9:39 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 11/10/2013 05:32 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 11/10/13 1:15 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>>> On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 Nov 20
Ok, so let's leave logging layer for now and we should focus on
preparing the first release
2013/11/9 Gary Gregory :
> Neither does log4j 2 ;)
>
> Original message
> From: henrib
> Date:11/09/2013 12:23 (GMT-05:00)
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [OGNL] Make use of
On 11/10/2013 05:32 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/10/13 1:15 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>> On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 13:13:05 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 11/
On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 16:11:59 +0100, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/10/2013 03:04 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 10:15:18 +0100, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Sat, 09 N
On 11/10/13 1:15 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>>> On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 13:13:05 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/5/13 5:21 AM, Gilles wrote:
> [...]
>>
On 11/10/2013 03:04 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 10:15:18 +0100, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>> On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 13:13:05 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>
On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 10:15:18 +0100, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 13:13:05 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/5/13 5:21 AM, Gilles wrote:
[...]
I have scanned
On 11/10/2013 07:03 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/9/13 3:27 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>> On 11/09/2013 11:21 PM, Gilles wrote:
>>> On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 13:13:05 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/5/13 5:21 AM, Gilles wrote:
[...]
I have scanned for exact duplicates quite a few
30 matches
Mail list logo
