Re: [Numbers] How far from a first release?

2017-06-04 Thread Gilles
Hello Eric. On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 22:03:44 +0200, Eric Barnhill wrote: As far as commons-complex goes. To conform the library to C standards, the entire approach to NaN had to be rethought. In fact it is not clear from the code what the justification was for the NaN approach in the present code.

Re: commons-fileupload git commit: Upgrade maven.compiler.source and maven.compiler.target to 1.6

2017-06-04 Thread Rob Tompkins
> On Jun 3, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I would be nice to document the change from Java 5 to 6 in a JIRA. Gotcha. Will do. Pardon my radio silence yesterday afternoon and today. Wedding and then overnight day job work (now that’s an oxymoron…heh). -Rob > > Gary > > -

Re: [FileUpload] Release FILEUPLOAD-279

2017-06-04 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote: > Should I leave it with Java 1.5 as the source and target? I cannot compile on > java 9 if I do. Further, are there any arguments to upgrading to > commons-parent 42? Yes, please do. What we want to release now is a bug fix release out of th

Re: [FileUpload] Release FILEUPLOAD-279

2017-06-04 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > We have a request to release FileUpload; > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/EditComment!default.jspa?id=13020471&commentId=16031153 > > To address https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FILEUPLOAD-279 > > Is anyone willing to RM? I'd

Re: [Numbers] How far from a first release?

2017-06-04 Thread Eric Barnhill
As far as commons-complex goes. To conform the library to C standards, the entire approach to NaN had to be rethought. In fact it is not clear from the code what the justification was for the NaN approach in the present code. To handle corner cases of nearly every operation in accordance with the s

Re: [io] Failure of org.apache.commons.io.FileUtilsTestCase.testContentEqualsIgnoreEOL()

2017-06-04 Thread sebb
I changed Jenkins IO build to use Windows and it built OK (though the deploy phase failed). Needs a bit more investigation... On 3 June 2017 at 18:27, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All, > > This test > fails: org.apache.commons.io.FileUtilsTestCase.testContentEqualsIgnoreEOL() > > With: > > java.lang

Re: [text] Correct RandomStringGenerator description of thread safety/immutability

2017-06-04 Thread Duncan Jones
> On 3 Jun 2017, at 09:55, sebb wrote: > > On 3 June 2017 at 08:40, Gilles wrote: >> Hi Duncan. >> >> Can we really say that "RandomStringBuilder instances >> are _immutable_ [...] if using the default random number >> generator"? >> Calling "nextInt" on the instance returned by >> ThreadLoca