>
>Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2016 3:41 AM
>Subject: Re: [Text] Any reason to not upgrade to lang 3.5
>
>
>
>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 9:38 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Bruno P. Kinoshita
>>> wrote:
>>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> From: Gary Gregory
> >> To: Commons Developers List
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2016 3:53 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [Text] Any reason to not upgrade to lang 3.5
> >>
> >>
Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 9:38 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Bruno P. Kinoshita
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to update away
>>>
>>> I think it could be a mistake while creating the initial project
>>> structure. Don't remember why there would b
over the code that causes our dependency on [lang], and maybe some of the
more complex methods?
-Rob
>
> -Rob
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> From: Gary Gregory
>>> To: Commons Developers List
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 8
moval of the dependency on [lang]?
-Rob
>
>
>>
>> From: Gary Gregory
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2016 3:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Text] Any reason to not upgrade to lang 3.5
>>
&
mber 2016 3:53 PM
>Subject: Re: [Text] Any reason to not upgrade to lang 3.5
>
>
>Update away. I'm not sure why shading is in the picture though.
>
>Gary
>
>
>On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was looking th
Update away. I'm not sure why shading is in the picture though.
Gary
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking through the pom and notice that [lang] is a dependency of
> [text], and the pom references [lang, 3.4]. Does anyone have any problems
> with upgrading
Hi,
I was looking through the pom and notice that [lang] is a dependency of [text],
and the pom references [lang, 3.4]. Does anyone have any problems with
upgrading to 3.5? The only thing that seems at all concerning is the comment in
the code stating:
the meaning of which isn’t enti
