We don't really know why it is being reported as an error. But what's important is to understand whether the report is valid or not.
The way to check that is to try it out, as noted else-thread: ---cut here--- We could also make some definite progress with an actual code example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled against the current version of the library and then run against the current RC, and see whether it crashes. ---cut here--- i.e. see what happens if someone updates the library without recompiling their code. Once we have established that the Clirr error is a false positive, this can be noted in the release notes. S. On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:20, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK > > I have checked > clirr is the same (comparing to 4.2) > > I would appreciate is someone can perform detailed analysis here of one > error (the first one from here [1]) > > first error is: > Message: "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been added to > an interface" > Class: "org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap" > Method/Field: "public java.util.Collection values()" > > BidiMap has method "Set<V> values()" since 4.0 (haven't checked earlier > versions), > java.util.Set extends java.util.Collection since java6 > The only thing was changed is "@Override" annotation was added > > Why is this being reported as error? > > [1] > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 23:50, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'll try to double-check if clirr version was changed > > So far I believe the issue is caused by java8 update > > > > Will report back here > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 23:39 Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> Hi. > >> > >> Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 17:21, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> a > >> écrit : > >> > > >> > It seems to be "stalemate situation" > >> > The test wasn't written for a long period of time > >> > >> Writing the test would seem to be the best chance. > >> > >> What is still not clear to me is whether the previous version > >> was released with Clirr errors too. > >> If yes, then the question might become: Why ask you to fix > >> what was broken before? > >> If not, then you could look whether the Clirr version was > >> changed in the meantime, and if so, run the older versions > >> of the tool until the issue disappears. > >> > >> > And there not enough votes to release :( > >> > >> That's an ever more recurring issue within "Commons", and > >> the PMC does not seem intent on recognizing it. :-/ > >> > >> Regards, > >> Gilles > >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 22:59 Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 16:17, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> > >> a > >> > > écrit : > >> > > > > >> > > > Actually I don't get what need to be tested :( > >> > > > Can you please provide "textual description" of what need to be > >> tested? > >> > > > >> > > Pasted from below: > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual > >> code > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled > >> against the > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the > >> current > >> > > RC, > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes. > >> > > > >> > > > Current version works as expected with Java8 application, no issues > >> > > > >> > > Then: Why a new major version? > >> > > It looks like sweeping dust under the carpet. ;-) > >> > > > >> > > If nobody wants to write a test, then we could just release the > >> current > >> > > RC (with a mention that Clirr signals errors that we chose to ignore), > >> > > and if someone complains later on (if indeed BC would have been > >> broken), > >> > > release a bugfix version. > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > Gilles > >> > > > >> > > > All current tests are green > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 19:14, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hello. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Le jeu. 17 janv. 2019 à 04:24, Maxim Solodovnik < > >> solomax...@gmail.com> > >> > > a > >> > > > > écrit : > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hello All, > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Shall I cancel this VOTE and change project coordinates to be > >> > > > > > commons-collections5 ? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I must have missed part of the thread... IMO, a major release is > >> not > >> > > > > the answer to a possible false positive. > >> > > > > Did you make the actual test (mentioned somewhere below)? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Best regards, > >> > > > > Gilles > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 01:04, Amey Jadiye <ameyjad...@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 5:25 pm Gilles < > >> gil...@harfang.homelinux.org > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > hi. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Gilles, > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 22:04:24 +0530, Amey Jadiye wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > Hello Maxim / All > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I put little more efforts to find out the possible cause > >> of the > >> > > > > > > > > error. > >> > > > > > > > > In the clirr code, I found the reason for this error and > >> same > >> > > is > >> > > > > > > > > documented > >> > > > > > > > > in clirr documentation [1]. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > A method declaration has been added to the specified > >> interface. > >> > > > > This > >> > > > > > > > > is > >> > > > > > > > > always reported as a binary-compatibility error, but in > >> > > practice, > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > changed class might be used successfully with code > >> compiled > >> > > against > >> > > > > > > > > the old > >> > > > > > > > > interface depending upon usage patterns. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Old code which invokes methods upon code compiled against > >> the > >> > > new > >> > > > > > > > > (expanded) interface will continue to work without > >> issues. And > >> > > old > >> > > > > > > > > code > >> > > > > > > > > which implements the old version of the interface will > >> also > >> > > > > continue > >> > > > > > > > > to > >> > > > > > > > > work correctly as long as no code attempts to invoke any > >> of the > >> > > > > > > > > newly-added > >> > > > > > > > > methods against that instance. But the code which > >> (validly) > >> > > invokes > >> > > > > > > > > one of > >> > > > > > > > > the new methods in the interface against an object which > >> > > implements > >> > > > > > > > > only > >> > > > > > > > > the old version of the interface will cause an > >> > > AbstractMethodError > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > > > > be > >> > > > > > > > > thrown at the time the method invocation is attempted. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > IIUC, new code that calls the new methods on [Collections] > >> > > classes > >> > > > > > > > will crash. Does not look good. > >> > > > > > > > On the other hand, Maxim wrote earlier that a method > >> reported by > >> > > > > > > > Clirr as "new" (cf. below) was in fact present since Java > >> 6... > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Are we then sure that it's a Clirr bug? > >> > > > > > > > If so, why did you not vote "+1" (on the condition that the > >> false > >> > > > > > > > positive is mentioned in the release notes)? > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We could also make some definite progress with an actual > >> code > >> > > > > > > > example that calls the incriminated methods, compiled > >> against the > >> > > > > > > > current version of the library and then run against the > >> current > >> > > RC, > >> > > > > > > > and see whether it crashes. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for directions here, I must also check that. Till then > >> I > >> > > would > >> > > > > like > >> > > > > > > to change my vote to -1 (Non Binding) for this release. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Alternatively, we could instate "revapi" in the POM (and > >> disable > >> > > > > > > > Clirr); and if the report is clean, trust that (though > >> "revapi" > >> > > is > >> > > > > > > > still beta). > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Opinions? > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Gilles > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In 4.2 and 4.3 looks like we have upgraded the java > >> version[2] > >> > > > > where > >> > > > > > > > > for > >> > > > > > > > > example for Map interface might have added a few more > >> methods > >> > > > > causing > >> > > > > > > > > these > >> > > > > > > > > errors. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > For this release, I am voting 0 (Non-Binding) as there is > >> > > unharmed > >> > > > > > > > > mess > >> > > > > > > > > around the clirr. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > rest of the things are OK with this release, I would > >> encourage > >> > > to > >> > > > > > > > > have > >> > > > > > > > > revapi replacing clirr. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [1] > >> http://clirr.sourceforge.net/clirr-core/exegesis.html > >> > > > > > > > > [2] > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/commit/482762a13f739631f94d03642b0a55a9b7214c44 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards, > >> > > > > > > > > Amey > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:53 AM Amey Jadiye < > >> > > ameyjad...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I spared little time on finding issue however didn't > >> found it > >> > > in > >> > > > > > > > >> clirr(may > >> > > > > > > > >> be hidden somewhere), today will check if clirr maven > >> plugin > >> > > have > >> > > > > > > > >> any > >> > > > > > > > >> issues. also I saw that few other apache commons modules > >> > > having > >> > > > > same > >> > > > > > > > >> issue > >> > > > > > > > >> and are released. > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> I also gave try on revapi with commons collection4 > >> 4.3RC2. > >> > > > > > > > >> revapi:check > >> > > > > > > > >> was clean unlike clirr, looks promising to replace clirr. > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> Regards, > >> > > > > > > > >> Amey > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, 12:31 pm Maxim Solodovnik < > >> > > > > solomax...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Hello All, > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Just checked clirr report one more time > >> > > > > > > > >>> This time I took 1 error and perform investigation: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> "Method 'public java.util.Collection values()' has been > >> > > added to > >> > > > > an > >> > > > > > > > >>> interface" org.apache.commons.collections4.BidiMap > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> In fact I don't understand why this error was reported > >> > > > > > > > >>> BidiMap extends java.util.Map > >> > > > > > > > >>> Map has method "public java.util.Collection values()" > >> in all > >> > > > > > > > >>> versions: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/Map.html > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Map.html > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Map.html > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> Maybe its clirr issue? > >> > > > > > > > >>> Would appreciate any help with this investigation > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 16:53, Gilles < > >> > > > > gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 07:41:40 +0700, Maxim Solodovnik > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > Hello Gilles, > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > I already did analysis: [1], all errors are caused > >> by > >> > > > > previous > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > release > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > 4.3 doesn't introduce any new errors ... > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/l7ftxlvdk4yqxijt > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > I had seen the post but it says: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > --- > >> > > > > > > > >>> > these errors are weird. Above classes has no changes > >> > > comparing > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > > > >>> 4.2 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > --- > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > But IMHO it was not a conclusion: If the cause of the > >> > > errors > >> > > > > was > >> > > > > > > > >>> > identified, it could have been mentioned in the > >> release > >> > > notes > >> > > > > > > > >>> > and/or the [VOTE] email, in order to avoid further > >> > > questioning. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Is the cause the change of supported JDK? > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Regards, > >> > > > > > > > >>> > Gilles > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 07:26, Rob Tompkins < > >> > > > > chtom...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> I’ll give it a look tonight or in the morning. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> -Rob > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > On Dec 30, 2018, at 12:25 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > No votes after 3 days :( > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > Is there anything wrong with the RC? > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 05:20, Bruno P. Kinoshita > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> <ki...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> FWIW I had a similar experience, and realized I > >> was > >> > > doing > >> > > > > > > > >>> `git > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> fetch --all`, but it didn't bring the tags. `git > >> fetch > >> > > > > --tags` > >> > > > > > > > >>> did > >> > > > > > > > >>> the > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> trick. After that I could `git checkout $tag-name` > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Cheers > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Bruno > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> ________________________________ > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> From: Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> To: dev@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:26 AM > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Commons collections 4.3 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 21:21:34 +0100, Gilles > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Hi. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:41:59 +0700, Maxim > >> > > Solodovnik > >> > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Apache Commons collections 4.3 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag name: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> collections-4.3-RC2 (signature can be > >> checked > >> > > from > >> > > > > git > >> > > > > > > > >>> using > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 'git > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> tag -v') > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> $ git tag -v collections-4.3-RC2 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> error: tag 'collections-4.3-RC2' not found. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Although I see it in the link below... > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> What is going on? > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> Issue vanished with a fresh "clone". > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> [Sorry for the noise.] > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> RC1 was cancelled due to some release steps > >> were > >> > > not > >> > > > > done > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Tag URL: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-collections.git;a=commit;h=77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Commit ID the tag points at: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 77e37dbf238d26351edb29e95391e3df75095d01 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Site: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/index.html > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> The Clirr report is still a problem: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/4.3-RC2/site/clirr-report.html > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> [The same errors are reported on my machine, > >> so it's > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> not a cache issue...] > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Regards, > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> Gilles > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files (committed at revision > >> 31689): > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/collections/ > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Distribution files hashes (SHA256): > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> commons-collections4-4.3-bin.tar.gz > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > 214c12fae27403f1a16ca6c108b5a8682be1a885a0dbbfc8eb30941303e1fe94 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> commons-collections4-4.3-bin.zip > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > 75b51a98fea6fca3746a3f70c6a0be24c99849e4976c4649214eaa5a009d0aeb > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> commons-collections4-4.3-src.tar.gz > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > 399f403feca86dbba7c4162eb90174db45979a2f7db2b3e0ba48240dc43ab434 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> commons-collections4-4.3-src.zip > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > 1c637e260b5b9e372d196593c7617ad3adedb6da3ac9196d086f9fc24401f5c3 > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> KEYS file to check signatures: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Maven artifacts: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1405/ > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> Please select one of the following options: > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> [ ] +1 Release it. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care. > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ... > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ... > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours, > >> i.e. > >> > > > > until > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> 2018-12-29T14:00:00Z > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> (this is UTC time). > >> > > > > > > > >>> > >> >>>> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > WBR > >> > > > > > Maxim aka solomax > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > WBR > >> > > > Maxim aka solomax > >> > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > >> > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
