Hello Simone,
Thanks for the update, we have been waiting. Although, I had this question,
I don't see the graph being listed as a project under sandbox, now that it
is moved there. My questions was related to how to submit patches or bugs.
as I don't see the project in Jira as well. Is it ok, if I
On Jun 16, 2011, at 2:17 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:54, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>
>> With all honesty - it should switch to ASM and not look back.
>
> Xalan uses BCEL too FWIW.
I'm not sure how that helps. From what I can tell Xalan is fairly close to
moving to the attic i
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> Not sure what
>> factors contributed to the stagnation of BCEL development, but I like
>> to think of Commons as "the" swiss army knife for Java developers--any
>> library with a sharply defined surface area and, even better,
>> satisfying s
I think 2.0 is the opportunity to do this right. Almost like we were
designing this from scratch.
Making the factory an invariant of the pool sounds good.
Otoh If a setFactory method exists it should be implemented fully. The
throw an exception impl is pretty "smelly".
Gary
On Jun 16, 2011, at
Hi al guys,
after few activity on graph I finally brought the component in a
decent state to start speaking with the rest of the community, also
because people interested on it are waiting :)
As I expressed in the previous mail, 'commons-graph' should be a
general purpose library for working with g
On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:54, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>
> Given that I have looked a bit after BCEL over the past few years here
> are my two cents:
>
> BCEL development is dead dead dead ... still people come and use it.
> Why they don't use ASM is beyond me. I myself use ASM whenever I can.
> For t
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 6:32 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> Perhaps Proxy could use BCEL to implement ProxyFactory (or whatever
> it's called these days).
As Thorsten wrote, they can (and perhaps even should) use ASM. The
fact that a project might be used by yet another project, is not a
sufficient r
On 6/16/11 10:19 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 16/06/2011 17:32, sebb wrote:
>> On 16 June 2011 17:25, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> Yesterday I fixed some [dbcp] "problems" caused by the new [pool]
>>> requirement that setFactory can only be called once. The quotes are
>>> because most of the problems we
On 16/06/2011 17:32, sebb wrote:
> On 16 June 2011 17:25, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Yesterday I fixed some [dbcp] "problems" caused by the new [pool]
>> requirement that setFactory can only be called once. The quotes are
>> because most of the problems were redundant calls to setFactory.
>> The reaso
On 6/16/11 9:32 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 16 June 2011 17:25, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Yesterday I fixed some [dbcp] "problems" caused by the new [pool]
>> requirement that setFactory can only be called once. The quotes are
>> because most of the problems were redundant calls to setFactory.
>> The reason
>> So according to you byte code manipulation is a "commonly encountered
>> need" for java developers?
>> I guess then Commons should/could be the home of virtually any java
>> library out there.
>
> Point taken; however, from the "when all you have is a hammer"
> perspective, if byte code generati
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>
> Point taken; however, from the "when all you have is a hammer"
> perspective, if byte code generation/manipulation were made easy
> enough, folk might use it more! ;)
>
Perhaps Proxy could use BCEL to implement ProxyFactory (or whatever
it
On 16 June 2011 17:25, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Yesterday I fixed some [dbcp] "problems" caused by the new [pool]
> requirement that setFactory can only be called once. The quotes are
> because most of the problems were redundant calls to setFactory.
> The reason that we left setFactory in [pool] is
Yesterday I fixed some [dbcp] "problems" caused by the new [pool]
requirement that setFactory can only be called once. The quotes are
because most of the problems were redundant calls to setFactory.
The reason that we left setFactory in [pool] is that [dbcp]'s
connection factory constructors call
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> Not sure what
>> factors contributed to the stagnation of BCEL development, but I like
>> to think of Commons as "the" swiss army knife for Java developers--any
>> library with a sharply defined surface area and, even better,
>> satisfying
> Not sure what
> factors contributed to the stagnation of BCEL development, but I like
> to think of Commons as "the" swiss army knife for Java developers--any
> library with a sharply defined surface area and, even better,
> satisfying some need commonly encountered by Java developers, belongs
>
On 6/16/11 8:22 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> (accidentally sent to Jochen personally before, sorry)
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>
>>> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever.
>> Are
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> (accidentally sent to Jochen personally before, sorry)
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>
>>> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguabl
(accidentally sent to Jochen personally before, sorry)
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>
>> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever.
>
> Are you sure, that's related? Reading [2], my under
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> It could just be that the other interested parties are on holiday, or
>> that they agree with the move and don't feel the need to say so.
>
> May be, but it should also be noted the replie
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever.
Are you sure, that's related? Reading [2], my understanding is that
JCS doesn't aim to implement JSR-107, but to be "close to".
[2] http://jakarta.apache.org/jcs/JCSandJCA
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM, sebb wrote:
> It could just be that the other interested parties are on holiday, or
> that they agree with the move and don't feel the need to say so.
May be, but it should also be noted the replies came from people like
you, which are most likely interested in J
+1 to Matt, wise said :)
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> First, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who hadn't heard of JCS.
> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever.
> I'd like
First, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who hadn't heard of JCS.
Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever.
I'd like to work on it. From the Jakarta threads, Thomas Vandahl
offered to step up, so given our low bar for existing ASF committers,
it should have enough ca
On 16 June 2011 14:53, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>
>
> Given that I have looked a bit after BCEL over the past few years here
> are my two cents:
>
> BCEL development is dead dead dead ... still people come and use it.
> Why they don't use ASM is beyond me. I myself use ASM whenever I can.
Just check
Given that I have looked a bit after BCEL over the past few years here
are my two cents:
BCEL development is dead dead dead ... still people come and use it.
Why they don't use ASM is beyond me. I myself use ASM whenever I can.
For those how want "easier" I would suggest javassist ...if it wasn'
2011/6/16 Mark Thomas :
> On 16/06/2011 13:07, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>> In all honesty, Rahul: For BCEL wouldn't it be better to archive it?
>
> For the record, Tomcat 7 is using a partial, package renamed fork of
> BCEL but isn't doing anything that might be considered active
> development. I don
On 16 June 2011 13:12, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> And now, after reading through the threads below: Same question for JCS?
>
> As I see it, you got only three replies in more than one week to such
> an important topic. That's not the smell of an active project?
It could just be that the other inter
On 16 June 2011 13:07, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> In all honesty, Rahul: For BCEL wouldn't it be better to archive it?
There have been quite a few changes to BCEL since the last release
(5.2), including several this year, so if we do archive it, let's at
least do another release first.
>
> On Thu,
On 16/06/2011 13:07, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> In all honesty, Rahul: For BCEL wouldn't it be better to archive it?
For the record, Tomcat 7 is using a partial, package renamed fork of
BCEL but isn't doing anything that might be considered active
development. I don't think a move to the attic would
And now, after reading through the threads below: Same question for JCS?
As I see it, you got only three replies in more than one week to such
an important topic. That's not the smell of an active project?
Jochen
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> In all honesty, Rahul:
In all honesty, Rahul: For BCEL wouldn't it be better to archive it?
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> As Jakarta winds down, we are looking for sustainable homes for couple
> of Java libraries -- BCEL [1] and JCS [2]. These aren't very different
> from many Commons librari
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 gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project commons-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
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 gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project commons-digester3-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
T
On 16 June 2011 03:24, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> As Jakarta winds down, we are looking for sustainable homes for couple
> of Java libraries -- BCEL [1] and JCS [2]. These aren't very different
> from many Commons libraries in size, number of developers, list
> traffic etc. Would Commons be interested
On 2011-06-16, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> As Jakarta winds down, we are looking for sustainable homes for couple
> of Java libraries -- BCEL [1] and JCS [2]. These aren't very different
> from many Commons libraries in size, number of developers, list
> traffic etc. Would Commons be interested in acce
- "Rahul Akolkar" a écrit :
> As Jakarta winds down, we are looking for sustainable homes for
> couple
> of Java libraries -- BCEL [1] and JCS [2]. These aren't very
> different
> from many Commons libraries in size, number of developers, list
> traffic etc. Would Commons be interested in ac
37 matches
Mail list logo
