Re: [pool] test failures

> On Nov 19, 2018, at 5:27 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > HI all: > > When I run 'mvn clean verify' on git master, I get test failures on my > rather busy CPU (~60-90%): > > [INFO] Running org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool > [ERROR] Tests run: 63, Failures: 2, Errors: 0,

Re: [pool] test failures

On Mon, 19 Nov 2018 at 14:27, Gary Gregory wrote: > > HI all: > > When I run 'mvn clean verify' on git master, I get test failures on my > rather busy CPU (~60-90%): > I can not replicate ∴java -version openjdk version "11.0.1" 2018-10-16 OpenJDK Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11.0.1+13) OpenJDK

[GitHub] commons-io pull request #69: refactor similar test cases

GitHub user yannickzj opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/commons-io/pull/69 refactor similar test cases Hi! As part of our research, we have developed a tool to suggest refactorings for test cases that appear to be similar. For Common-IO, it suggested these r

[GitHub] commons-pool pull request #18: NO-JIRA: Fix failing rat check

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/commons-pool/pull/18 --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 2:48 PM Phil Steitz wrote: > Sorry ENOTIME, but I remembered that there is a nullsafe > addIdleObject (see how addObject does it). In fact, you might just > replace the manual create and add with just a call to addObject > itself. That will also passivate the object befo

[pool] test failures

HI all: When I run 'mvn clean verify' on git master, I get test failures on my rather busy CPU (~60-90%): [INFO] Running org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool [ERROR] Tests run: 63, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 177.53 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

Sorry ENOTIME, but I remembered that there is a nullsafe addIdleObject (see how addObject does it).  In fact, you might just replace the manual create and add with just a call to addObject itself.  That will also passivate the object before putting it into the pool, which is IIRC an invariant (

Re: [IO] Provenance of copied code in InfiniteCircularInputStream

Hi All: I agree that the 0xff usage does not need to be documented, and while I do see it used in ByteArrayInputStream#read() in Oracle Java 6, I really do not think we need to refer to it. I am +1 to removing the comment. Who will do the honors? Gary On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 10:15 AM Mark Thoma

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

A unit test? Yes please! :-) Gary On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 1:23 PM Mark Struberg wrote: > +1 for the null check. > > Do you want to re-open the ticket and create a patch? > > I've created a unit test which proves my original problem with the > dead-lock. > So any improvement should be rather on

Re: commons-compress git commit: shorten method name

:-) Gary On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 9:25 AM wrote: > Repository: commons-compress > Updated Branches: > refs/heads/master f132d6c50 -> 6e47be35f > > > shorten method name > > > Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-compress/repo > Commit: > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/as

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

+1 for the null check. Do you want to re-open the ticket and create a patch? I've created a unit test which proves my original problem with the dead-lock. So any improvement should be rather on the safe side from here on. Regarding the RC: this is really not needed anymore when working with G

Re: [IO] Provenance of copied code in InfiniteCircularInputStream

I'd image the comment is referring to the use of "... & 0xFF" but it seems to be a fairly pointless comment as that is just the standard way to switch from signed byte to 'unsigned' int values. I can't see what else it could possibly be referring to. I don't see any IP issue here. I'd suggest si

Re: [IO] Provenance of copied code in InfiniteCircularInputStream

Hi everybody, the code is from a pull request which I merged: https://github.com/apache/commons-io/pull/8 I did not author the code. The comment seems incorrect because I do not think there is a field "repeatedContent" in java.io.ByteArrayInputStream. The current OpenJDK implementation looks

Re: [1/3] commons-compress git commit: COMPRESS-470 make sure all ScatterZipOutputStreams are closed

On 2018-11-18, Gary Gregory wrote: > ensureStreamsAreClosed() seems like an over the top name. Why not simply > closeAll()? Or close(). Because I've got a track record for choosing bad names to defend :-) Stefan - To unsubscrib

[GitHub] commons-pool issue #17: POOL-359: prevent NPE closing multiple GenericObject...

Github user graben commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-pool/pull/17 #18 fixes actual failing travis build! --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional command

[IO] Provenance of copied code in InfiniteCircularInputStream

Hi All and Pascal S., Sharon (Eclipse) has pointed out to me that in org.apache.commons.io.input.InfiniteCircularInputStream.read() [1], we have: @Override public int read() { position = (position + 1) % repeatedContent.length; return repeatedContent[position] & 0xff; // c

[GitHub] commons-pool pull request #18: NO-JIRA: Fix failing rat check

GitHub user graben opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/commons-pool/pull/18 NO-JIRA: Fix failing rat check You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/graben/commons-pool NO-JIRA Alternatively you can review and

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

On 11/19/18 8:19 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 6:04 AM Rob Tompkins wrote: I’d be happy to roll the release if we get master to where you want it. IMO, we should integrate the recent PR I mentioned and roll RC3. Note that this vote subject thread did not contain an RC number

[GitHub] commons-rng issue #14: fix: removed 1.8 annotation to ensure 1.7 compliance

Github user coveralls commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-rng/pull/14 [](https://coveralls.io/builds/20181767) Coverage remained the same at 97.544% when pulling **6dca4630fb4df34eb5e106d

[GitHub] commons-rng issue #14: fix: removed 1.8 annotation to ensure 1.7 compliance

Github user coveralls commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-rng/pull/14 [](https://coveralls.io/builds/20181767) Coverage remained the same at 97.544% when pulling **6dca4630fb4df34eb5e106d

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 6:04 AM Rob Tompkins wrote: > I’d be happy to roll the release if we get master to where you want it. > IMO, we should integrate the recent PR I mentioned and roll RC3. Note that this vote subject thread did not contain an RC number. Sticking to the usual process would be

[GitHub] commons-rng pull request #14: fix: removed 1.8 annotation to ensure 1.7 comp...

GitHub user aherbert opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/commons-rng/pull/14 fix: removed 1.8 annotation to ensure 1.7 compliance Noticed this JDK 1.8 annotation when compiling on a machine with Open JDK 1.7 (it broke). The pom.xml for commons-rng-examples uses

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

AFAIK source-release is quite standard @asf so likely saner to use that from now on IMHO. Agree sources is needed but Think Mark's point was more about assemblies than default release artifacts. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 5:22 AM Mark Struberg wrote: > Oki, I now see what you mean. > > We actually have 3 source zips now. > > .src.zip > .source-release.zip > src.jar > > That's a mess. > > There should only be 2: > * source-release.zip is the official ASF packages whole build sources. > This

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

I’d be happy to roll the release if we get master to where you want it. Cheers, -Rob > On Nov 19, 2018, at 7:18 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > Oki, I now see what you mean. > > We actually have 3 source zips now. > > .src.zip > .source-release.zip > src.jar > > That's a mess. > > There shoul

Re: [VOTE] [CANCEL] Release Apache Commons Pool2 2.6.1

Oki, I now see what you mean. We actually have 3 source zips now. .src.zip .source-release.zip src.jar That's a mess. There should only be 2: * source-release.zip is the official ASF packages whole build sources. This includes the pom, build structure etc. * src.jar is the sources which are au

[GitHub] commons-rng issue #13: RNG-61: Remove unnecessary conditional from inside sh...

Github user coveralls commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-rng/pull/13 [](https://coveralls.io/builds/20175287) Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 97.552% when pulling **d3ac7f75e2ed7e21fc48c

[GitHub] commons-rng pull request #13: RNG-61: Remove unnecessary conditional from in...

GitHub user aherbert opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/commons-rng/pull/13 RNG-61: Remove unnecessary conditional from inside shuffle loop I have also updated the constructor exception messages to be clearer on what has failed and added a Javadoc link to a definition