Hi,
I'm in my mobile, so don't expect to much prose from me :)
Making nextRecord() public and the example you provided in the jira look like a
hack to me. Let's finish 1.0 and then think about this feature. It feels like
an Addition to the API that can easily be integrated after 1.0
my 2 cents
Ping...
revert? keep it public?
Gary
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> For those of you who do not follow JIRA closely. Please take a look at my
> reasoning in [CSV-110] for changing the visibility of
> CSVParser.nextRecord() to public from package private.
>
>
+1 (non binding)
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-04-07 23:22 GMT+02:00 William Speirs :
> +1 non-binding vote...
>
> Bill-
> On Apr 7, 2014 1:50 PM, "Matt
+1 non-binding vote...
Bill-
On Apr 7, 2014 1:50 PM, "Matt Benson" wrote:
> I would like to release Commons Proxy 2.0.
>
> Commons Proxy 2.0 RC1 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/proxy/ (svn revision
> 4960)
>
> Maven artifacts are here:
>
> h
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28920&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 20:20:41 +
Finished at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 20:24:09 +
Total time: 3m 28s
Build Trigger: Schedu
I would like to release Commons Proxy 2.0.
Commons Proxy 2.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/proxy/ (svn revision 4960)
Maven artifacts are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1022
Details of cha
On 7 April 2014 20:13, sebb wrote:
> On 7 April 2014 18:39, Thomas Vandahl wrote:
>> On 04.04.14 02:32, sebb wrote:
>>> The FileDiskCacheUnitTest was failing because the tests were dependent
>>> on the file timestamp resolution, so the cache did not always treat
>>> the first created file as the
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28916&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 19:20:40 +
Finished at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 19:24:17 +
Total time: 3m 36s
Build Trigger: Schedu
On 7 April 2014 19:59, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Thanks for pointing this out. I'm not 100% sure but I think removing the
> comment all together will cause a check style error (or find bugs? don't
> know). So you would have to suppress that one an document why. Seems easier
> to just use the inheri
Well, let's discuss, I've started another thread on the ML at the time of
the commit. :)
The reason I committed the visibility change is that I wanted the user to
be able to download and play with an alternate implementation than what I
feel is a weird bolt-on.
Gary
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:55
On 7 April 2014 18:39, Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> On 04.04.14 02:32, sebb wrote:
>> The FileDiskCacheUnitTest was failing because the tests were dependent
>> on the file timestamp resolution, so the cache did not always treat
>> the first created file as the oldest.
>> Adding pauses as necessary fixe
Thanks for pointing this out. I'm not 100% sure but I think removing the
comment all together will cause a check style error (or find bugs? don't
know). So you would have to suppress that one an document why. Seems easier
to just use the inheritDoc...
2014-04-06 23:40 GMT+02:00 sebb :
> On 6 Apr
Well you're mail indicated you wanted to discuss this first. I'd like to
leave this out of 1.0 and really think this through.
2014-04-07 16:50 GMT+02:00 :
> Author: ggregory
> Date: Mon Apr 7 14:50:26 2014
> New Revision: 1585496
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1585496
> Log:
> [CSV-110] Add ab
On 04.04.14 02:32, sebb wrote:
> The FileDiskCacheUnitTest was failing because the tests were dependent
> on the file timestamp resolution, so the cache did not always treat
> the first created file as the oldest.
> Adding pauses as necessary fixed this.
I inherited the code. Personally, I'd throw
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28905&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 15:21:36 +
Finished at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 15:24:56 +
Total time: 3m 20s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Hi All:
For those of you who do not follow JIRA closely. Please take a look at my
reasoning in [CSV-110] for changing the visibility of
CSVParser.nextRecord() to public from package private.
Gary
[CSV-110] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CSV-110
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg.
Hi Cyrille,
I do not think that the outlined testcase really illustrates a bug.
By default, a MapBackedSet will use "null" as dummy value to put into the
actual Map, but a ReferenceMap does not allow such null values (as
indicated by the message in the NullPointerException that is thrown).
You ha
Dear developers,
We have found several issues in Apache commons collections, version
3.2.1. However, in the meantime that version has been superseded by
version 4.0.
Is there still interest in bug reports on the previous version?
The bugs are not very serious but it would still be good to fix the
+1
Downloaded sources (sig and md5 OK) and built site with:
Apache Maven 3.2.1 (ea8b2b07643dbb1b84b6d16e1f08391b666bc1e9;
2014-02-14T12:37:52-05:00)
Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.2.1\bin\..
Java version: 1.7.0_51, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_51\jre
De
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28895&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 11:20:39 +
Finished at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 11:24:14 +
Total time: 3m 35s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28892&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 10:20:35 +
Finished at: Mon 7 Apr 2014 10:24:04 +
Total time: 3m 28s
Build Trigger: Schedu
21 matches
Mail list logo