Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF incubation proposal

well, we can figure out something, so I'll start the discussion at general@incubator.a.o On 04/02/15 11:14, Sergio Fernández wrote: Hi, we still need a Champion for incubating the project: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF#Champion So if you be great if any Commons PMC Member w

Re: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

Le 04/02/2015 20:57, Mark Roberts a écrit : > I would like to reopen BCEL-79, but I'm new to JIRA and I can't figure out > how to do it.Reopen does not appear to be one of the choices on the drop > down tools menu. Could someone let me know how to do this? I reopened it, you can go ahead.

RE: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

I would like to reopen BCEL-79, but I'm new to JIRA and I can't figure out how to do it.Reopen does not appear to be one of the choices on the drop down tools menu. Could someone let me know how to do this? Thank you, Mark Roberts -Original Message- From: benjamin.j.mcc...@gmail

RE: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

Sorry - I clearly misunderstood Ben's email about issues 187-193 (the reference to issue 79 made me think the mail was specific to me). However, my comments about 6.0 are still valid and I will open new issues for my work immediately. Thank you, Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Rob

RE: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

Thank you for setting these up for me! I am going to attach my diffs today. I would really like to see this material in 6.0. Most all of the changes are bug fixes or feature enhancements (in the case of StackMap support). They all, in my opinion, make BCEL a better product. And on a persona

Re: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

BCEL-79 has not been reopened yet The new issues have been filed as BCEL-187 through BCEL-193 . Are any of these blocking the 6.0 release or do you think we might be able to cut that now? Thanks, Ben

Re: [DBCP] needless sync on getNumActive, getNumIdle?

On 4 February 2015 at 13:51, Phil Steitz wrote: > I had to go around getNumIdle to avoid waiting on a this lock in the > unit test I just committed. With pool 2 and volatile connectionPool > instance, I don't think this sync is needed any more. Same with the > sync on getNumActive. Am I missing

[DBCP] needless sync on getNumActive, getNumIdle?

I had to go around getNumIdle to avoid waiting on a this lock in the unit test I just committed. With pool 2 and volatile connectionPool instance, I don't think this sync is needed any more. Same with the sync on getNumActive. Am I missing something here? Phil ---

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF incubation proposal

Hi, we still need a Champion for incubating the project: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF#Champion So if you be great if any Commons PMC Member who is also ASF Member (there quite few actually) would be our champion. Thanks. Cheers, On 02/02/15 16:57, Sergio Fernández wrote:

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Hi, On 03/02/15 18:55, Reto Gmür wrote: Personally I've always seen Jena and Sesame as the real implementations. They sure are two of the best and most popular triplestore arounds, nevertheless an API should map the standards to Java, not concrete implementations. That's what clerezza wants to