Re: [proxy] svn commit: r587475 - in /commons/proper/proxy/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/proxy/interceptor/SerializingInterceptor.java test/java/org/apache/commons/proxy/interceptor/TestSeri

2007-10-23 Thread James Carman
Darn it, I upgraded IDEA to 7.0 when it came out and forgot to set up the Copyright plugin. I'm on it... On 10/23/07, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/23/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Author: jcarman > > Date: Tue Oct 23 05:27:05 2007 > > New Revision: 5874

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Project commons-jelly-tags-jaxme (in module commons-jelly) failed

2007-10-23 Thread commons-jelly-tags-jaxme development
To whom it may engage... This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html, and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project commons-jelly-tags-jaxme has an issue affecting its community integration. This

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Project commons-jelly-tags-jsl-test (in module commons-jelly) failed

2007-10-23 Thread commons-jelly-tags-jsl development
To whom it may engage... This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html, and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project commons-jelly-tags-jsl-test has an issue affecting its community integration. Th

Re: [proxy] svn commit: r587475 - in /commons/proper/proxy/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/proxy/interceptor/SerializingInterceptor.java test/java/org/apache/commons/proxy/interceptor/TestSeri

2007-10-23 Thread Rahul Akolkar
On 10/23/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Author: jcarman > Date: Tue Oct 23 05:27:05 2007 > New Revision: 587475 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=587475&view=rev > Log: > PROXY-4: SerializingInterceptor > > Added: > > commons/proper/proxy/trunk/src/main/java/org/apa

Re: [validator] EmailValidator.isValidIpAddress()

2007-10-23 Thread Ben Speakmon
I was thinking that too. Seems like a good compromise between compatibility and cleanup. On 10/23/07, Jörg Schaible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on : > > > That's certainly the solution of least impact and works for me. Sucks > > that we would have to keep a whole depende

RE: [validator] EmailValidator.isValidIpAddress()

2007-10-23 Thread Jörg Schaible
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on : > That's certainly the solution of least impact and works for me. Sucks > that we would have to keep a whole dependency for one deprecated > method in one deprecated class, but life is hard sometimes. We may set it to optional though and point it out inthe release not