Added in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-335
There's no git tag for 2.4.3, so I can't really even find a way to backport the option as it is. On 5 November 2017 at 22:01, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I probably can, yeah. Totally slipped my mind about this, though! > > On 5 November 2017 at 21:46, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Matt, >> >> Any chance you get take a look this week? >> >> Gary >> >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > On 31/10/17 14:44, Gary Gregory wrote: >> > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> On 31 October 2017 at 04:21, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> If the methods are required then that makes 2.4.3 broken in my >> view. In >> > >>> which case we should wait for 2.4.4 before updating the version DBCP >> > >>> depends on. I don't think we should adapt the test. The test is >> telling >> > >>> us something is broken. We should fix the root cause not change the >> > test. >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> Regarding this, if the method names were expected in the output, >> then a >> > >> unit test should have existed to verify that. The existing test was >> only >> > >> checking for class names, so I'm assuming that's why I made the >> change a >> > >> while back to optimize it for that use case. I think I asked on the >> > mailing >> > >> lists first, but that was a while ago. >> > >> >> > > >> > > It sounds like the missing unit test in [pool] was actually in [dbcp]! >> > :-p >> > > >> > > Matt or Mark, would you mind pitching in to fill out this missing >> test? >> > >> > I'll help out when I can but I'm heads down working through the DAEMON >> > issues at the moment. It is probably going to be a few days before I'm >> > done there. >> > >> > Mark >> > >> > >> > > >> > > Thank you, >> > > Gary >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> - fix pool >> > >>> - release pool 2.4.4 >> > >>> - update DBCP to pool 2.4.4 >> > >>> - release DBCP >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> Sounds good to me. This can be done by just removing the >> SecurityManager >> > >> version since a StackWalker version of CallStack could be implemented >> > for >> > >> Java 9, so it would be pointless to fully revert the change. >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
