My second attempt at releasing a commons project; please be gentle. :-)
RC2 includes sebb's patches that make numerous instance variables
immutable.
NOTE: No one has yet explicitly said on-list that they have tested DbUtils
1.2 RC1 or RC2 with a real database. We should not release it until
sebb wrote:
I think there are some problems with thread-safety.
Yikes! I didn't investigate very carefully the thread-safety claims of
these classes (again, not much has changed since 1.1) but I agree with
your assessment, now that I open my eyes and think about it.
In revision 752369 I i
One more try :)
Stating that the Java version is 1.4 on the website will be done
post-release (I'm going to split the CLI and CLI2 websites).
---
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/cli/tags/cli-1.2-RC6
Site remains unchanged:
http://people.apache.org/~bayard/cli-1.2-rc1
Bin
1.4 it is then. I cba to deal with duplicated build logic in my old age :)
So a pom change, update to latest junit then regenerate dist.
Hen
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:10 AM, sebb wrote:
> Duh - ignore that.
>
> Just noticed that ParserTestCase is an abstract class...
>
> I used "mvn ant:ant" t
I think there are some problems with thread-safety.
QueryRunner Javadoc says the class is thread-safe. However it has a
protected mutable variable DataSource which can also be set/got via
public methods. If one thread sets the variable, another may not see
the correct value, so the class is not th
Jörg Schaible wrote:
However, IBM JDK 6 fails here:
---
Test set: org.apache.commons.dbutils.QueryRunnerTest
---
Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Err
sebb wrote:
-0.5 because the unit tests seem wrong.
I've incorporated your feedback in revision 752322. For the record, all
of those tests predate DbUtils 1.1; we haven't touched them in years.
I think these test changes are pretty minor; not worth an additional RC.
What do you think?
-
Not claiming that it is setup properly but jci is a m2 multi project.
Still maybe worth having a look.
Welcome to a world of pain ...which I found m2 is when you go multi project.
That said it seems to be working for the maven folks - so maybe it's
just a user error.
cheers
--
Torsten
On Tue, M
+1 from me
>> From: Henri Yandell
>> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 6:41 PM
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: [VOTE] Release Commons CLI 1.2 (RC5)
>>
>> One more shot :)
>>
>>
>> Tag:
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/cli/tags/cli-1.2-RC5
>>
>> Site remains uncha
The case for us supporting Java 1.3 is that someone is actively maintaining an
application based on Java 1.3 only and wants to upgrade CLI 1.1 to 1.2. How
likely is that?
As we all know, Java 1.3.1 is done: "On Windows, Linux, Solaris 9, and Solaris
10 J2SE 1.3.1 has completed the Sun End of L
Duh - ignore that.
Just noticed that ParserTestCase is an abstract class...
I used "mvn ant:ant" to create the build file so I could test with 1.3
and the generated file did not exclude ParserTestCase.
When it is excluded, the tests complete OK.
Perhaps there is a case for renaming that class ;
That would certainly help with testing...
I tried removing the test case with the Java 1.4 class, and the test
still fails on Java 1.3.1_20 (Win/XP).
The failure is
Cannot instantiate test case: testSimpleShort
(java.lang.InstantiationException:
org.apache.commons.cli.ParserTestCase
at java.
Why not change the Java req. to Java 1.4 for CLI 1.2? (Hides from flying
tomatoes.)
Gary
-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:45 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons CLI 1.2 (RC5)
-1
Will not build on Jav
Will be a close match with commons-exec ... :-)
Siegfried Goeschl
Henri Yandell wrote:
> Easy enough to fix - that was only introduced due to a real world
> test. Wonder if we're going to hit a record RC wise...
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 5:44 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> -1
>>
>> Will not build on
I have some code to start with (never been anywhere but my box so no IP
problems) but I am currently using Ant + Ivy. This will be an empty project
with n subprojects so I feel I will need a ridiculous amount of handholding to
get this set up properly with m2. Do any of our Maven mavens have
Are we thinking of using Java 5 for CLI 2.0?
G
-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:45 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons CLI 1.2 (RC5)
-1
Will not build on Java 1.3 as java.sql.ParameterMetaData is @sin
Easy enough to fix - that was only introduced due to a real world
test. Wonder if we're going to hit a record RC wise...
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 5:44 AM, sebb wrote:
> -1
>
> Will not build on Java 1.3 as java.sql.ParameterMetaData is @since 1.4.
>
> So at least the Java source version in the POM
On 10/03/2009, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2009-03-10, sebb wrote:
>
> > On 10/03/2009, bode...@apache.org wrote:
>
>
> >> standard NOTICE header, a bit of whitespace
>
> > The header is specifically NOT required for NOTICE files, which is why
> > RAT does not insist on adding one.
>
>
> The
On 2009-03-10, sebb wrote:
> On 10/03/2009, bode...@apache.org wrote:
>> standard NOTICE header, a bit of whitespace
> The header is specifically NOT required for NOTICE files, which is why
> RAT does not insist on adding one.
The nice thing about policies is that they change every so often
On 10/03/2009, bode...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: bodewig
> Date: Tue Mar 10 09:34:08 2009
> New Revision: 752029
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=752029&view=rev
> Log:
> standard NOTICE header, a bit of whitespace
The header is specifically NOT required for NOTICE files, which is
-1
Will not build on Java 1.3 as java.sql.ParameterMetaData is @since 1.4.
So at least the Java source version in the POM needs changing.
I've not yet tried testing on Java 1.3 after building on 1.4
Also the site does not appear to mention the minimum Java requirements anywhere.
BTW, if it is d
21 matches
Mail list logo
