Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

Noting that because this is being worked on by Jörg and Matt (and it seems close to resolution), I'll hold off on tagging an RC2. Hen On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:27 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Jörg Schaible > wrote: >> Hi Hen, >> >> Henri Yandell wrote: >> >>> It's A

Re: [math] Improving tests and performance of RandomGenerator implementations

On 8/3/11 10:05 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 03/08/2011 18:15, Phil Steitz a écrit : >> On 8/3/11 9:02 AM, sebb wrote: >>> On 3 August 2011 09:06, Luc Maisonobe >>> wrote: Le 03/08/2011 09:38, Luc Maisonobe a écrit : > Le 01/08/2011 22:40, Luc Maisonobe a écrit : >> Hi Phil, >> >

Re: [compress] XZ support and inconsistencies in the existing compressors

Is this ? On 2011-08-04, Lasse Collin wrote: > On 2011-08-04 Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2011-08-04, Lasse Collin wrote: >>> Yes. I didn't check the suggested fix though. >> Would be nice if you'd find the time to do so. > It uses in.av

[compress] Need API Feedback/Advice for ZipArchiveOutputStream ans ZIP64

Hi, there are eight possible permutations of compressed/uncompressed entries that get written to a seekable-/non-seekable stream whose size is either known or unknown prior to writing them. One of them is prohibited (uncompressed/non-seekable/unknown size) and has been prohibited before, no chang

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Aug 5, 2011, at 16:27, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> On 8/5/11 12:53 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: >>> HttpComponents would be SFL4j in my structure. They definitely need >>> debugging. >>> >>> Lang or Codec don't. >>> >>> If I had to generalize, I'd

[Math] linearCombination (Was: Re: svn commit: r1154250 - [...])

> [...] I've allowed myself to adapt your code to an array version of the accurate "linearCombination" (committed in revision 1154416). Here is a micro-benchmark (for an array of length 3): - linearCombination (runs per timed block: 1, timed blocks: 1000) direct inline: 1.789185e-05 (1

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Aug 5, 2011, at 16:27, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/5/11 12:53 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> HttpComponents would be SFL4j in my structure. They definitely need >> debugging. >> >> Lang or Codec don't. >> >> If I had to generalize, I'd say it's because HttpComponents is not at >> the bottom of its

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On 05/08/2011 9:53 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: It's a set of decisions you have to make - what I'm advocating (with 'if you can help it') is to ask yourself "do I need logging?" rather than "how can I add logging?". I think a lot is added due to the latter approach. +1 Hen -- Ceki -

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On 8/5/11 12:53 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > HttpComponents would be SFL4j in my structure. They definitely need debugging. > > Lang or Codec don't. > > If I had to generalize, I'd say it's because HttpComponents is not at > the bottom of its stack. You need to know what the communication is > betwee

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

HttpComponents would be SFL4j in my structure. They definitely need debugging. Lang or Codec don't. If I had to generalize, I'd say it's because HttpComponents is not at the bottom of its stack. You need to know what the communication is between HttpComponents and the API below it (ie) a http con

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> I think we should move the current trunk off and call it generics-RnD. >> >> Then we should copy 3.2 over to trunk (or maybe 3.3, I seem to recall >> that prior to merging the generics in

Re: svn commit: r1154250 - in /commons/proper/math/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/math/util/MathUtils.java site/xdoc/changes.xml

Le 05/08/2011 20:48, Phil Steitz a écrit : I am +1 on the idea here and am wondering if we should think a little more radically even. Greg has - correctly, IMO - complained that the current structure of the linear package makes it awkward to implement optimized operations for some classes of mat

Re: svn commit: r1154250 - in /commons/proper/math/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/math/util/MathUtils.java site/xdoc/changes.xml

I am +1 on the idea here and am wondering if we should think a little more radically even. Greg has - correctly, IMO - complained that the current structure of the linear package makes it awkward to implement optimized operations for some classes of matrices and operations. I a wonder whether it

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Bill Speirs wrote: >> IMO, saying "Don't do logging in a library" seems like a bad rule. >> >> The HTTPComponents client has logging and it has been VERY helpful to be >> able to turn on debug logging and see wh

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons - Commons Lang - Default Maven 2 Build Definition (Java 1.5)

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=10966&projectId=95 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 15:38:32 + Finished at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 15:39:07 + Total time: 34s Build Trigger: Schedule Build

Re: Deploying snapshot builds

It would be nice to have consistency. I dream of a day where pom.xml's are so different from component to component :) Gary On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/4/11 11:45 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> If we are going to vote let's make a decision per project. > > No, I thin

Re: Deploying snapshot builds

I didn't read Emmanuel's response that way. If we vote to allow publishing snapshots not every project should have to do that, but they would all be allowed to.  I would not be in favor of a vote that forces every project to publish snapshots. Ralph On Aug 5, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Phil Steitz wr

Re: Deploying snapshot builds

I agree with Phil, there should be a general agreement http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/4/11 11:45 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> If we are going to vote let's make a decision per project. > > No, I think th

Re: Deploying snapshot builds

On 8/4/11 11:45 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > If we are going to vote let's make a decision per project. No, I think this needs to be decided at the Commons level. The PMC are collectively responsible for what we publish where. In the past, we have ad hoc published snapshots for individual compone

Re: [CANCEL] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > Gah - too many version numbers :) > > Consider 3.0.1 RC1 cancelled. I'll roll a 3.0.2 tonight with both of You must mean 3.0.1 RC2, not 3.0.2. ;) Gary > the changes (changes/release notes and directory). > > No idea on FindBugs. :( > > Hen

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Hi Hen, > > Henri Yandell wrote: > >> It's August, which must mean it's time for 3.0.1 :) >> >> RC1 is available here: >> >>   http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-3.0.1-RC1/ >> >> SVN: >> >>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/

[CANCEL] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

Gah - too many version numbers :) Consider 3.0.1 RC1 cancelled. I'll roll a 3.0.2 tonight with both of the changes (changes/release notes and directory). No idea on FindBugs. :( Hen On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:08 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > -1: The directory in commons-lang3-3.0.1-src.z

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons - Commons Lang - Default Maven 2 Build Definition (Java 1.5)

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=10962&projectId=95 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Failed Started at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 14:22:16 + Finished at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 14:23:01 + Total time: 45s Build Trigger: Schedule Build

Re: Deploying snapshot builds

I don't see any harm in providing the snapshot builds. I have personally deployed some on an ad-hoc basis to make it easier to develop other sandbox-level libraries against the snapshots while waiting for e.g. lang3 to be released. Matt On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > If

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

Hi All: -1: The directory in commons-lang3-3.0.1-src.zip is for 3.0, not 3.0.1 :( Is there a way to get rid of the FindBugs bug report with a code comment? It's a bummer that FB can't dive in the code and see what Validate does. Gary On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Hi H

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Bill Speirs wrote: > IMO, saying "Don't do logging in a library" seems like a bad rule. > > The HTTPComponents client has logging and it has been VERY helpful to be > able to turn on debug logging and see what requests and responses are going > over the wire. Yes, I

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > I think we should move the current trunk off and call it generics-RnD. > > Then we should copy 3.2 over to trunk (or maybe 3.3, I seem to recall > that prior to merging the generics in we had a 3.3 ready for release). > > We then release 3.3.

Re: [compress] ZIP64: API imposed limits vs limits of the format

On 2011-08-04, Torsten Curdt wrote: >> ZipFile relies on RandomAccessFile so any archive can't be bigger than >> the maximum size supported by RandomAccessFile.  In particular the seek >> method expects a long as argument so the hard limit would be an archive >> size of 2^63-1 bytes.  In practice

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

IMO, saying "Don't do logging in a library" seems like a bad rule. The HTTPComponents client has logging and it has been VERY helpful to be able to turn on debug logging and see what requests and responses are going over the wire. Yes, I could fire up Wireshark and get the same info, but turning o

Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons - Commons Lang - Default Maven 2 Build Definition (Java 1.5)

... at least release will not be auto-published ... ;-) Continuum@vmbuild wrote: > Online report : > http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=10954&projectId=95 > > Build statistics: > State: Failed > Previous State: Ok > Started at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 08:39:03 + >

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-proxy-test (in module apache-commons) failed

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

Re: [math] Implementation of Conjugate Gradient (MATH-581)

Hi, I've attached a patch to modify the exceptions (exception.patch), and the updated files concerning the CG method. Sebastien 2011/8/4 Gilles Sadowski : >> [...] >> >> The management of the exception messages through String constants and enums >> is >> in my view a very clean thing. Should we d

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

Hi all guys, I would *personally* avoid all that amount of work, people already migrated to google-collections/guava so I wouldn't invest efforts on providing releases incrementally, but rather focused on a fresh new release that could attract again users that left us. Just my small 2cents, Simo h

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

Well said Hen, big +1 :) > > B) If you are an app, use log4j. or logback, depending on the cases, IMHO > Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: >> On Wed,

Re: [compress] ZIP64: API imposed limits vs limits of the format

On 2011-08-04, Lasse Collin wrote: > On 2011-08-04 Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> There are a few places where our implementation doesn't allow for the >> full range the ZIP format would support. Some are easy to fix, some >> hard and I'm asking for feedback whether you consider it worth the >> effort

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

I don't mind multiple releases with (2), thats a see how it goes type approach. Stephen On 5 August 2011 08:38, Henri Yandell wrote: > Repeating myself just to make sure you're in full agreement; there > would be multiple releases within your 2) state. ie) Maybe we > genericize one method and the

[continuum] BUILD FAILURE: Apache Commons - Commons Lang - Default Maven 2 Build Definition (Java 1.5)

Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=10954&projectId=95 Build statistics: State: Failed Previous State: Ok Started at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 08:39:03 + Finished at: Fri 5 Aug 2011 08:39:46 + Total time: 42s Build Trigger: Schedule Build Num

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

Hi Hen, Henri Yandell wrote: > It's August, which must mean it's time for 3.0.1 :) > > RC1 is available here: > > http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-3.0.1-RC1/ > > SVN: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/lang/tags/LANG_3_0_1_RC1/ > > Maven artifacts: > > htt

[VOTE] Release Commons Lang 3.0.1 [Based on RC1]

It's August, which must mean it's time for 3.0.1 :) RC1 is available here: http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-3.0.1-RC1/ SVN: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/lang/tags/LANG_3_0_1_RC1/ Maven artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-3.0.1-RC1/mav

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

Repeating myself just to make sure you're in full agreement; there would be multiple releases within your 2) state. ie) Maybe we genericize one method and then release [to take it to extremes]. Hen On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > I agree with this. And I think it ser

Re: [collections] 4.0 release path

I agree with this. And I think it serves users better, many of whom have migrated to Google Guava. 1) New bug fix only release, JDK 1.4 compatible 2) New release with some generics, backwards compatible 3) Re-evaluate whether an incompatible release makes sense Stephen On 5 August 2011 07:12, H