For those asking for a CLIRR, I have created one base upon RC3:
https://people.apache.org/~chas/bcel-6.0-RC3/clirr-report.html
regards,
chas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/10/15 7:28 PM, ggreg...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: ggregory
> > Date: Tue Aug 11 02:28:11 2015
> > New Revision: 1695193
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1695193
> > Log:
> > Preparing release 1.2-RC1.
> >
> > Modified:
> > comm
On 8/10/15 7:28 PM, ggreg...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: ggregory
> Date: Tue Aug 11 02:28:11 2015
> New Revision: 1695193
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1695193
> Log:
> Preparing release 1.2-RC1.
>
> Modified:
> commons/proper/csv/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Modified: commons/proper/csv/trun
On 10 August 2015 at 18:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 5:35 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 10 August 2015 at 13:17, Dave Brosius wrote:
>> > I'm not sure having the 6 in bcel6 is such a good idea. the prefix
>> already
>> > disambiguates the package name, so this isn't needed and is
On 10 August 2015 at 18:04, Gary Gregory wrote:
> How can this issue affect an unreleased version?
Because the previous version has the deprecations, and we cannot fix it in that.
> Do you plan on fixing it for 7.0? I am guessing not.
It can only be done for a major version bump.
6.0 is one suc
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 5:35 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 10 August 2015 at 13:17, Dave Brosius wrote:
> > I'm not sure having the 6 in bcel6 is such a good idea. the prefix
> already
> > disambiguates the package name, so this isn't needed and is kind of
> > limiting.
>
> The convention has been to tie
How can this issue affect an unreleased version? Do you plan on fixing it
for 7.0? I am guessing not.
Gary
-- Forwarded message --
From: Charles Honton (JIRA)
Date: Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:58 AM
Subject: [jira] [Created] (BCEL-231) Remove deprecated methods.
To: iss...@commons.apa
On 10 August 2015 at 13:17, Dave Brosius wrote:
> I'm not sure having the 6 in bcel6 is such a good idea. the prefix already
> disambiguates the package name, so this isn't needed and is kind of
> limiting.
The convention has been to tie the package/component names to the
major release version.
I'm not sure having the 6 in bcel6 is such a good idea. the prefix
already disambiguates the package name, so this isn't needed and is kind
of limiting.
On 08/10/2015 06:49 AM, sebb wrote:
Assuming that the package name change is required, then there are also
a lot of mutable non-private field
Assuming that the package name change is required, then there are also
a lot of mutable non-private fields that need to be made private.
I am happy to make these changes, but I don't wish to change the API
until the need for a break is established.
On 10 August 2015 at 11:22, sebb wrote:
> I am
I am currently -1 because of:
Several uses of deprecated methods and classes.
Given that there is a new package name/Maven id, now is the time to
remove any deprecated items.
There is some very strange code in Utility.java:
865 & 868:consumed_chars = ++consumed_chars;
The
11 matches
Mail list logo
