already there:
https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/commit/a2dce32cdab108e7e281dfc27dd0a394e1419ce1
https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/commit/fdf05fa29babe21e64f9a5b268dc8406d449d4f1
Am 08.09.2017 um 19:01 schrieb Gary Gregory:
Unit test SVP! ; -)
Gary
On Sep 8, 2017 10:26, wrote:
Re
Unit test SVP! ; -)
Gary
On Sep 8, 2017 10:26, wrote:
> Repository: commons-lang
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/master d6ad3f015 -> a2dce32cd
>
>
> LANG-1349: EqualsBuilder#isRegistered: swappedPair construction bug
> (closes #282)
>
> SwappedPair constructed as Pair.of(rhs,lhs)
>
>
> Proje
On Sep 8, 2017 09:51, "Rob Tompkins" wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2017, at 11:48 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> On Sep 8, 2017 09:31, "Oliver Heger" wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> Am 08.09.2017 um 17:13 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
>> I’m going to work on RC5 with the changes that Oliver suggested now that
> no one else
> On Sep 8, 2017, at 11:48 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> On Sep 8, 2017 09:31, "Oliver Heger" wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> Am 08.09.2017 um 17:13 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
>> I’m going to work on RC5 with the changes that Oliver suggested now that
> no one else has chimed in.
>
> I just noticed that the
On Sep 8, 2017 09:31, "Oliver Heger" wrote:
Hi Rob,
Am 08.09.2017 um 17:13 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
> I’m going to work on RC5 with the changes that Oliver suggested now that
no one else has chimed in.
I just noticed that the source files of Jelly still have the header with
the old Apache license
Hi Rob,
Am 08.09.2017 um 17:13 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
> I’m going to work on RC5 with the changes that Oliver suggested now that no
> one else has chimed in.
I just noticed that the source files of Jelly still have the header with
the old Apache license format. Here copyright dates are contained
I’m going to work on RC5 with the changes that Oliver suggested now that no one
else has chimed in.
Oliver - again, many thanks for the eyes.
-Rob
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:44 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Commons Jelly 1.0.1 RC4 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org
So it would be a 3.0. Do we expect anything else in a potential 3.0?
Le 8 sept. 2017 16:38, "Thomas Vandahl" a écrit :
On 06.09.17 20:54, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Ok so sounds a 2.3 from master for next release is ok, or are you bound
> somehow to 2.2 ans prefer some backports?
It should not
On 06.09.17 20:54, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Ok so sounds a 2.3 from master for next release is ok, or are you bound
> somehow to 2.2 ans prefer some backports?
It should not have sounded like that. All the mentioned changes in trunk
*break binary compatibility* and require a major version updat
