Chas,
Thank you for preparing a release candidate.
-1
RAT says some license header are off:
https://people.apache.org/~chas/bcel-6.0-RC4/rat-report.html
@author tags should be removed.
Also, you need to provide a Clirr report based on the old package name
posted somewhere, so we can see what t
The last BCEL release (5.2) occurred in February of 2006. It’s been
nine years since the last release and four years since the code was
transferred to commons. Over this time, java byte code has been
enhanced with additional opcodes and dynamic language support.
Supporting these byte
Does 6.0 break BC with 5.2? If not, there is no need to change the package
and coords.
Gary
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 2:21 PM
Subject: svn commit: r1694911 [2/8] - in /commons/proper/bcel/trunk: ./
src/examples/ src/examples/Mini/ src/main/java/org/a
On 8/9/15 2:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/9/15 1:52 PM, James Carman wrote:
>> Sorry, on my phone and can't see how to post online. My point is that it
>> seems silly to reinvent the wheel when it comes to proxies and
>> interceptors. That's precisely what Commons Proxy is designed to do. It
>>
Ok suit yourself.
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 5:08 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/9/15 1:52 PM, James Carman wrote:
> > Sorry, on my phone and can't see how to post online. My point is that it
> > seems silly to reinvent the wheel when it comes to proxies and
> > interceptors. That's precisely what Comm
On 8/9/15 1:52 PM, James Carman wrote:
> Sorry, on my phone and can't see how to post online. My point is that it
> seems silly to reinvent the wheel when it comes to proxies and
> interceptors. That's precisely what Commons Proxy is designed to do. It
> already has pluggable proxy factories. Just
Sorry, on my phone and can't see how to post online. My point is that it
seems silly to reinvent the wheel when it comes to proxies and
interceptors. That's precisely what Commons Proxy is designed to do. It
already has pluggable proxy factories. Just use that.
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 4:46 PM Phil
Can we please not top-post. Gets hard to follow.
On 8/9/15 10:17 AM, James Carman wrote:
> Okay, how about this for a proposal? We create a new module in
> commons-proxy called commons-proxy-pool which has a nice base class for
> folks to be able to create proxy objects to be members of their po
On Aug 9, 2015 12:17 PM, "James Carman" wrote:
>
> Okay, how about this for a proposal? We create a new module in
> commons-proxy called commons-proxy-pool which has a nice base class for
> folks to be able to create proxy objects to be members of their pool. We
> could call it ProxiedPoolableOb
Okay, how about this for a proposal? We create a new module in
commons-proxy called commons-proxy-pool which has a nice base class for
folks to be able to create proxy objects to be members of their pool. We
could call it ProxiedPoolableObjectFactory or something like that. This
class would have
If you want to decorate the calls to the pooled objects, then use commons
proxy and a delegator proxy. Let's not bleed into other areas. Let pool
concentrate on what it does best.
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 11:45 AM James Carman
wrote:
> I lean toward listeners instead. Much simpler
> On Sun, Aug 9,
I lean toward listeners instead. Much simpler
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 11:35 AM Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/9/15 8:07 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 09.08.2015 02:49, James Carman wrote:
> >> Yep, same thing I said back in the day. Would we want it to be a
> >> true
> >> "interceptor" or more
On 8/9/15 8:07 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:
>
>
> On 09.08.2015 02:49, James Carman wrote:
>> Yep, same thing I said back in the day. Would we want it to be a
>> true
>> "interceptor" or more of a "listener"?
>
> Sounds like a usual and interesting feature. IIUC the proposal of
> Phil, it goes more in t
On 8/8/15 5:49 PM, James Carman wrote:
> Yep, same thing I said back in the day. Would we want it to be a true
> "interceptor" or more of a "listener"?
Actually, we are probably talking about two different things here,
unless interceptors also get pool lifecycle events[1]. Most pool
logging shoul
Hi all
I'm tyring to get things together for a new attempt at releasing
Compress 1.10. trunk has seen significant changes in the zip package by
Kristian that I looked over back then and modified in a few places.
I merged the changes over to Ant and they've ben release as Ant 1.9.5
where we've al
On 09.08.2015 02:49, James Carman wrote:
Yep, same thing I said back in the day. Would we want it to be a true
"interceptor" or more of a "listener"?
Sounds like a usual and interesting feature. IIUC the proposal of Phil,
it goes more in the direction of interceptors.
A point to keep in mi
16 matches
Mail list logo
