Any objections to Chris' request? The Jira he referred to is a small backwards compatible enhancement (rather than bug fix). We'd normally keep this for new releases but it does open up much nicer Spring integration options, so I am not too worried about back-porting this one.
Other opinions? Cheers, Paul. On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 6:02 AM, John Wagenleitner <john.wagenleit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jim, > > I think the file you might be looking for is: > > src/main/org/codehaus/groovy/runtime/StringGroovyMethods.java > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Pascal Schumacher > <pascalschumac...@gmx.net> wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> not sure what you mean by "String.metadata function"? >> >> If you like to contribute code to groovy open a jira ticket and send us a >> pull request. >> >> Cheers, >> Pascal >> >> >> Am 16.02.2016 um 10:18 schrieb jim northrop: >> >> Hi Pascal >> could you pls point me to where i can donate a tiny piece of >> String.metadata function ? >> >> thx >> jim >> >> On 16 February 2016 at 08:12, Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumac...@gmx.net> >> wrote: >>> >>> I fixed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7742 by reverting as >>> Shils and John suggested in the discussion of >>> https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/253 >>> >>> Am 15.02.2016 um 22:12 schrieb Pascal Schumacher: >>>> >>>> Hi Cédric, >>>> >>>> great news. :) >>>> >>>> I think before https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7742 should >>>> be resolved, by either applying https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/253 >>>> or >>>> reverting >>>> https://github.com/apache/groovy/commit/fae29119a1102393ae5d1645c3fc1e06547b0ad8 >>>> >>>> If nobody more qualified offers his opinion on how to handle this I >>>> would just revert, so we can release. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Pascal >>>> >>>> Am 15.02.2016 um 10:45 schrieb Cédric Champeau: >>>>> >>>>> Hi guys, >>>>> >>>>> As promised, I will try to find some time to perform a release this >>>>> week. The last one is months ago already, and even if we had decided to >>>>> migrate to a smoother process, nobody managed to made the modifications >>>>> yet. >>>>> >>>>> As such and if nobody disagrees, I will perform a release this week >>>>> using the "old" incubating process. >>>>> >>>>> Please backport every fix you think is worth having on the 2.4.x branch >>>>> asap. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
