What is the status on strong encryption in zip files? That is - I know we
don't have it, but is there a reason why it hasn't been added or is it just
an itch that hasn't been scratched?
I can see several levels of values
1. add ZipExtraField handlers for the five extra fields of interest (0x14,
0
Actually I don't know how the old actor (with the array param) was supposed to
work. The compiler won't let you create a Command[]...
Am 11.06.2013 um 22:00 schrieb Simone Tripodi :
> I usually don't take too much care to this kind of warnings...
>
> My opinion is you can feel free to keep the
I usually don't take too much care to this kind of warnings...
My opinion is you can feel free to keep the best option you like :P
best and thanks,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> This wi
This will cause warnings in client code, so better revert it?
Am 11.06.2013 um 21:47 schrieb brit...@apache.org:
> Author: britter
> Date: Tue Jun 11 19:47:16 2013
> New Revision: 1491924
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1491924
> Log:
> Use var args instead of array as parameter
>
> Modified:
>
So my initial assumption was occrect and I won't add this issue to changes.xml.
thanks!
Am 11.06.2013 um 17:32 schrieb Paul Benedict :
> I always thought changes.xml was to describe the release package. If the
> ticket produced no artifact update, why does it need to be part of the
> distributio
At least 72 hours have passed and the votes are as follows:
Binding +1
Oliver Heger
Gary Gregory
Sebastian Bazley
Non-Binding +1
Benedikt Ritter
There were no other votes.
Since there are at least 3 +1 binding votes and more +1 than -1, the
vote passes.
Many thanks to all who tested the releas
On 8 June 2013 01:10, sebb wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons NET 3.3 based on RC1.
>
> This is mainly a bug-fix release, but includes a few minor improvements.
> NET 3.3 requires a minimum of Java 1.5
>
> [X] +1 release it
Here's mine
> [ ] +0 go ahead I don't care
> [ ] -1 no, d
+1
Looks good building src zip with:
Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da; 2013-02-19
08:51:28-0500)
Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.0.5\bin\..
Java version: 1.7.0_21, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_21\jre
Default locale: en_US, pl
I always thought changes.xml was to describe the release package. If the
ticket produced no artifact update, why does it need to be part of the
distribution?
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I see no harm as adding it to changes.xml, it's a doc change that we might
> as we
I like the consistency (but I do not care which style is picked ATM :)
G
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 11/06/2013 17:18, sebb a écrit :
>
> > It would be easier to write scripts etc if the architecture tag always
> > came in the same position, so would there be a
I see no harm as adding it to changes.xml, it's a doc change that we might
as well document like any other doc or site change.
Gary
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we had this request [1] to create a git mirror for [beanutils]. I created a
> [infra] ticket
Le 11/06/2013 17:18, sebb a écrit :
> It would be easier to write scripts etc if the architecture tag always
> came in the same position, so would there be any objection to renaming
> bin-windows as windows-bin ?
Or rename -native-src to -src-native to keep the related archives
grouped in the dir
Just noticed that the naming convention for the tarballs/zips is a bit mixed up:
commons-daemon-1.0.15-bin.zip
commons-daemon-1.0.15-bin-windows.zip
commons-daemon-1.0.15-native-src.zip
commons-daemon-1.0.15-src.zip
'native' appears before -src whereas 'windows' appears after -bin.
It would be e
Hello,
we had this request [1] to create a git mirror for [beanutils]. I created a
[infra] ticket and linked it to our ticket. Now infra has created the
mirror and closed their issue. My question is: do I track that beanutils
now has a git mittor via changes.xml?
It is an information that users m
On 11 June 2013 11:34, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 2013/6/10 sebb
>
>> On 10 June 2013 21:32, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>> > Hey Sebb,
>> >
>> > Am 10.06.2013 um 21:31 schrieb sebb :
>> >
>> >> On 9 June 2013 16:12, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>> >>> Hello sebb,
>> >>>
>> >>> Am 09.06.2013 um 16:38 schrie
2013/6/10 sebb
> On 10 June 2013 21:32, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> > Hey Sebb,
> >
> > Am 10.06.2013 um 21:31 schrieb sebb :
> >
> >> On 9 June 2013 16:12, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> >>> Hello sebb,
> >>>
> >>> Am 09.06.2013 um 16:38 schrieb sebb :
> >>>
> On 9 June 2013 11:18, wrote:
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
