Daniel Le Berre wrote:
Oleg Gusakov a écrit :
The tree could be walked in two directions, and these approaches are
equivalent, except for b and c optionality:
Representation #1: P2
a1 -> b1 or b2 or b3
a1 -> c1 or c2
b1 + b2 + b3 <= 1 # this one implicates that b is optional
c1 + c2 <=
Oleg Gusakov a écrit :
> The tree could be walked in two directions, and these approaches are
> equivalent, except for b and c optionality:
>
> Representation #1: P2
>
> a1 -> b1 or b2 or b3
> a1 -> c1 or c2
>
> b1 + b2 + b3 <= 1 # this one implicates that b is optional
> c1 + c2 <= 1 # t
I cannot add much - The Guru has spoken :)
I'll just try to answer the question.
Daniel Le Berre wrote:
Hi Gilles,
Gilles Scokart a �crit :
Thanks to remind us the mathematic curses :-)
But I have some questions :
What does the '>=' constraints represent ?
-b1 + a1 >=0
-b2 + a1 >=0
-b3
Hi Gilles,
Gilles Scokart a écrit :
> Thanks to remind us the mathematic curses :-)
>
> But I have some questions :
>
> What does the '>=' constraints represent ?
>
> -b1 + a1 >=0
> -b2 + a1 >=0
> -b3 + a1 >=0
> -c1 + a1 >=0
> -b2 + a1 >=0
the variables are boolean (can only take 0/1 values).
Brett Porter wrote:
Didn't notice that one in there at the time.
Not surprising given the few tests we have ;-). I was already wondering
whether we should create some index/text file that groups the existing
ITs into categories (e.g. dependency resolution, lifecycle,
interpolation) to get a
Thanks to remind us the mathematic curses :-)
But I have some questions :
What does the '>=' constraints represent ?
-b1 + a1 >=0
-b2 + a1 >=0
-b3 + a1 >=0
-c1 + a1 >=0
-b2 + a1 >=0
If I take -b1 + a1 >=0, I interpret it as "if I take b1, I must take
a1". I fail to see why you are adding this
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Did you get my most recent response? (wasn't sure if it went awol or you
The packaging binding to do a new phase generate?
I'm reluctant to go down this path because it requires a change to the
pom to get ide support working.
(Which shouldn
On 19/12/2008, at 8:27 PM, bentm...@apache.org wrote:
Author: bentmann
Date: Fri Dec 19 01:27:22 2008
New Revision: 727985
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=727985&view=rev
Log:
o Extended IT to consider MNG-2097
Thanks! Didn't notice that one in there at the time.
I think we can remove
Did you get my most recent response? (wasn't sure if it went awol or
you were just looking for other alternatives)
On 20/12/2008, at 7:42 AM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
Anyone else with suggestions?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
Shane Isbell wrote:
I talked with Jason last month about moving and renaming maven-shared-model
Given that the code has moved, does the code in the shared area [0]
serve any purpose or can it be deleted?
Benjamin
[0] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/shared/trunk/maven-shared-model
10 matches
Mail list logo
