Thank you Uwe.
The next step here is to get a release manager to volunteer. Anyone?
Gary
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Uwe Barthel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’ve opened the first 3 pull requests for JXPath.
> All of these are patches or tests attached on JIRA items.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jir
Hi,
I’ve opened the first 3 pull requests for JXPath.
All of these are patches or tests attached on JIRA items.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JXPATH-118
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JXPATH-160
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JXPATH-177
Maybe merge the pull requests provide
Hi,
I'm not a committer but interested and looking forward to work on/with both
solutions.
-- Uwe
On November 20, 2015 6:50:53 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/20/15 7:33 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Hi Eirik,
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
...Do we need a declare
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> ...So the real question is is anyone interested in working on
> this code?...
Good question indeed - I'll very probably use it so yes I would
contribute to its maintenance.
-Bertrand
-
On 11/20/15 7:33 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi Eirik,
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> ...Do we need a declare a "winner" between notsoserial and IO-487..
> I don't think so, definitely not - both are useful tools for different
> use cases.
>
>> ...My take is tha
Hi Eirik,
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> ...Do we need a declare a "winner" between notsoserial and IO-487..
I don't think so, definitely not - both are useful tools for different
use cases.
> ...My take is that if a donation to Apache Commons can make people be more
>
Hi Commons PMC,
(Sorry for being a bit late to the table)
I see three questions being discussed here:
1) Is notsoserial a "great solution" or a "useful solution" in mitigating
the problem of promiscuous deserialization?
2) Is it a "better" solution than IO-487?
3) Is it in the interest of Common
