[ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Commons DBCP 2.0.1 released

2014-05-24 Thread Phil Steitz
The Apache Commons Team is pleased to announce the release of Apache Commons DBCP 2.0.1. The Apache Commons DBCP open source software library implements database connection pooling. Version 2.0.1 is a patch release, including bug fixes only. Source and binary distributions are available for downl

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons BeanUtils - Apache Commons (Test build - see how to get round OOME)

2014-05-24 Thread Apache Continuum
Online report : https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=31338&projectId=65 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Sat 24 May 2014 20:20:06 + Finished at: Sat 24 May 2014 20:21:49 + Total time: 1m 42s Build Trigger: Sched

Re: [VETO] Re: [jcs] What's next?

2014-05-24 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
basically I respected all remarks, only pendings ones are: 1) modules 2) I removed Serializable from *API* of auxilary caches since it prevent a lot of things like using it only in memory on not serializable objects for instance. The constraint is still on the impl which need it but not more in th

Re: [VETO] Re: [jcs] What's next?

2014-05-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On 5/24/14, 10:46 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi > > > 2014-05-24 19:42 GMT+02:00 Phil Steitz : > >> On 5/22/14, 11:40 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>> Well was "commons-jcs" more than commons since [proxy] for instance is >>> already very modular. >> ? - sorry I can't make any sense out of th

Re: [VETO] Re: [jcs] What's next?

2014-05-24 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
Hi 2014-05-24 19:42 GMT+02:00 Phil Steitz : > On 5/22/14, 11:40 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > Well was "commons-jcs" more than commons since [proxy] for instance is > > already very modular. > ? - sorry I can't make any sense out of that comment. Maybe you are > saying we can modularize? S

Re: [VETO] Re: [jcs] What's next?

2014-05-24 Thread Phil Steitz
On 5/22/14, 11:40 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Well was "commons-jcs" more than commons since [proxy] for instance is > already very modular. ? - sorry I can't make any sense out of that comment. Maybe you are saying we can modularize? Sounds like a good idea. > > > Ok so we should decide som

Re: [vfs] support JCIFS

2014-05-24 Thread sebb
On 23 May 2014 17:59, Dan Tran wrote: > I think we just need to promote vfs-cifs and mark jcifs optional. That > complies with Apache's policy ASF policy requires that downstream consumers should not be forced to use non-compatible depenendencies. Such dependencies are allowed if the product is s