XxxxMXBean interfaces are (arguably) a special case since they exist to
expose methods via JMX.
I wouldn't expect any users of DBCP to be implementing this interface.
If we think there is a real risk that users have implemented this
interface (for what use case?) then I can add default impleme
Did you have an old NOTICE file in the directory where you built the jcs
release? I read the release instructions [1] and the code of
commons-release-plugin [2], and found nothing that appeared to replace files or
dates. The tag on GitHub is showing NOTICE.txt (with the extension) with the
cor
If you add methods to an existing interface, this will break binary
compatibility unless you add them as default methods. Or am i missing
something?
Gary
On Wed, Jan 5, 2022, 14:10 wrote:
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>
> markt pushed a commit to branch m
By the way, we should also start a new ML thread when we change
subject (this thread was about "Build Failure", not about modifying a
previous PR).
Thanks,
Gilles
Le mer. 5 janv. 2022 à 17:50, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>
> On GH, the "feature" branch referred to below is at
>
> https://gith
On GH, the "feature" branch referred to below is at
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/tree/feature__MATH-1563__genetic_algorithm
Le mer. 5 janv. 2022 à 17:45, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>
> Hello.
>
> Le mer. 5 janv. 2022 à 09:26, Avijit Basak a écrit :
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> >I h
Hello.
Le mer. 5 janv. 2022 à 09:26, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi All
>
>I have identified a few *protected* methods which could be made
> *private*. Those are mostly validation methods of input arguments and used
> internally. Keeping them as protected won't add much value considering
>
Hi Bruno,
> Am 05.01.2022 um 06:41 schrieb Bruno P. Kinoshita
> :
>
> I didn't have much time, so inspected only one file, randomly selected, from
> the dist area. The src zip. @Thomas, I think the NOTICE has the date 2020? I
> think that can be fixed later? Everything else looks OK in that fi
Hi All
I have identified a few *protected* methods which could be made
*private*. Those are mostly validation methods of input arguments and used
internally. Keeping them as protected won't add much value considering
future extension. I would like to do the modification.
It would be
