Re: [git] pushing through github - permission denied

2018-10-18 Thread Gary Gregory
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:55 PM Gilles wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 11:36:46 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: > > No Commons components are in gitbox BTW :-( > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-geometry.git > > Ah, thank you for proving me wrong! :-) Gary > Gilles > > > > > Gary > > > >

Re: [git] pushing through github - permission denied

2018-10-18 Thread Gilles
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 11:36:46 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: No Commons components are in gitbox BTW :-( https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-geometry.git Gilles Gary On Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 11:24 Matt Sicker wrote: On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 19:56, Gary Gregory wrote: > The github mir

Re: [git] pushing through github - permission denied

2018-10-18 Thread Gary Gregory
No Commons components are in gitbox BTW :-( Gary On Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 11:24 Matt Sicker wrote: > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 19:56, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > The github mirror is one way. I am not sure if GitBox changes that. > > > > GitBox is two-way, git-wip (old system) is one-way. Also gives y

Re: [git] pushing through github - permission denied

2018-10-18 Thread Matt Sicker
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 19:56, Gary Gregory wrote: > The github mirror is one way. I am not sure if GitBox changes that. > GitBox is two-way, git-wip (old system) is one-way. Also gives you the option of using GitHub Issues instead of Jira, but that's optional. -- Matt Sicker

Re: [git] pushing through github - permission denied

2018-10-18 Thread Gilles
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 18:56:29 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: The github mirror is one way. I am not sure if GitBox changes that. Gary On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:50 PM Eric Barnhill wrote: I tried something new for my latest changes - pushing through Apache's github site rather than apache.org .

Re: [numbers] Making fractions VALJOs

2018-10-18 Thread Gilles
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 16:33:58 -0700, Eric Barnhill wrote: Oh right, that is the convention. I knew there was something off. As far as you understand, is to within VALJO standards to overload factory methods, I don't think that it is ValJO-related; method overload is a feature, so better use i