[CANCEL][VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

On 10/16/2013 12:20 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to call a vote for releasing Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1. > > Email 1.3.2 RC1 is available for review here: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/email/ > (svn revision 3275) > > Maven artifacts are her

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

Wooo! I won on my first post, and by being on the fence. Be afraid when I have a strong opinion, be wery, wery afraid :) Not allowed to drink though. Hacking along tonight, I'm reminded of one reason why I would like to try Git in Commons. It's the only place I tend to be working on parallel issue

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Henri Yandell wrote: > > > My first thought was "We should delete that page". :) > > Done at least for "Release In Progress", last change 4 years ago. Funny > enough it had a line for Collections 4.0 ;-) > > There's a lot of obsolete data i

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

Henri Yandell wrote: > My first thought was "We should delete that page". :) Done at least for "Release In Progress", last change 4 years ago. Funny enough it had a line for Collections 4.0 ;-) There's a lot of obsolete data in the wiki. - Jörg ---

[Commons Wiki] Update of "CommonsCommitters" by JörgSchaible

Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Commons Wiki" for change notification. The "CommonsCommitters" page has been changed by JörgSchaible: https://wiki.apache.org/commons/CommonsCommitters?action=diff&rev1=14&rev2=15 Comment: No unmaintained "release in progre

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

Those who wanted to move to Git have given up several days ago, leaving this thread to be 'argued' by those who successfully squashed the action. James has already canceled the test project request in INFRA, and so it seems pointless for this thread to continue. You won, go off and have a beer,

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 15/10/2013 09:13, Henri Yandell a écrit : > > > Related; here's the output of a 2006 script I've dusted off to show the > > number of commits and from who to each component in 2013: > > > > http://people.apache.org/~bayard/ActivityRepor

Re: svn commit: r1532460 - /commons/trunks-proper/CHALLENGE.txt

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:05 PM, sebb wrote: > On 15 October 2013 19:22, Matt Benson wrote > > > Should we also have (interested)? E.g., I am *interested* in > > VFS, particularly VFS3, but I have never committed any code to that > > component as yet. Do we care to capture that in any way for

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

There's no veto notion here - if we're abiding by the lowest denominator of the base Apache voting rules, vetoes are only for code votes. While this is to do with code, it's not code itself. I see it settled in that an understanding is reached. The majority of those voting have indicated that the

Re: [math] Method min, max, percentile in StatUtils support int[], long[], etc

+1 On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:06 AM, 杨栓 wrote: > Hi, > > I always need to compute min value, max value, percentile values of > millions data, these data may are int, long or double. But class StatUtils > only > supports double[], I need to convert int[], long[] to double[]. Shall we > add a feat

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

So did any committer want to exercise a veto? Otherwise the matter is settled right? On Oct 16, 2013 6:38 PM, "sebb" wrote: > On 17 October 2013 02:10, Ralph Goers wrote: > > > > On Oct 16, 2013, at 2:46 PM, James Ring wrote: > > > >> Do Apache by-laws require a quorum? Was there a quorum for th

[math] Method min, max, percentile in StatUtils support int[], long[], etc

Hi, I always need to compute min value, max value, percentile values of millions data, these data may are int, long or double. But class StatUtils only supports double[], I need to convert int[], long[] to double[]. Shall we add a feature that StatUtils supports any other numeric type?

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 17 October 2013 02:10, Ralph Goers wrote: > > On Oct 16, 2013, at 2:46 PM, James Ring wrote: > >> Do Apache by-laws require a quorum? Was there a quorum for this vote? >> > > Apache voting rules are documented at > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html. However, that page doesn't > def

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Gilles wrote: > Consequently, the lexicographic comparator will definitely be slower since > it > will needlessly spend time ordering the values. Yeah if value's compareTo() is expensive, this could hurt. Here, for an Integer value it's going to be a rounding er

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On Oct 16, 2013, at 2:46 PM, James Ring wrote: > Do Apache by-laws require a quorum? Was there a quorum for this vote? > Apache voting rules are documented at http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html. However, that page doesn't define "consensus" which is where some of the disagreement ca

Re: [math][lang] LANG-912: Math.sum(int...)

Thanks Gilles. I've moved it over. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:24 AM, Gilles wrote: > On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 02:12:41 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote: > >> Should this issue be in Math? >> >> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/LANG-912 >> >> Perhaps as

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:59 PM, sebb wrote: > On 16 October 2013 12:25, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > > If nobody is willing to put a component to "dormant" state, then the > > label doesn't make any sense. I would vote to remove the dormant state in > > general. > > If we don't have any need of

Re: [Commons Wiki] Update of "ContributorsGroup" by JörgSchaible

On 16 October 2013 07:54, Jörg Schaible wrote: > > It seems it is unnecessary for committers to be added here, otherwise I > would not have been able to add myself. Not so; you are part of https://wiki.apache.org/commons/AdminGroup which is the group that is allowed to update ContributorsGroup

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

On 16 October 2013 12:25, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > If nobody is willing to put a component to "dormant" state, then the > label doesn't make any sense. I would vote to remove the dormant state in > general. > If we don't have any need of a specific component we can put it to > attic.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 10/16/13 2:39 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 16/10/2013 21:34, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >>> On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: > On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz wrote: >> O

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:43:18 +0100, Sean Owen wrote: No, it's the current implementation that is technically wrong. Pair.java defines equality as equality of both keys and values. Comparator orderings are supposed to be consistent with equals() ( http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/ut

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

On 10/16/2013 07:39 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > I have issue when builing on the command line - > >> mvn clean install > > Oct 16, 2013 10:39:02 AM org.subethamail.smtp.server.ServerThread run > INFO: SMTP server *:2510 stopped > emailMessage > =

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

Do Apache by-laws require a quorum? Was there a quorum for this vote? On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: >> On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> On 10/13/13 8:09 AM, James Carman wrote: Well, it has been 72 hours, so let's tal

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

No, it's the current implementation that is technically wrong. Pair.java defines equality as equality of both keys and values. Comparator orderings are supposed to be consistent with equals() ( http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/Comparator.html). That is, two Pairs should be equal i

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 16/10/2013 21:34, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > > On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: > >>> On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 10/13/13 8:09 AM, James Carman wrote: > >>>

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

Hello. On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:43:47 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: Hi. [...] I had originally used .of() for consistency with Commons Lang (is that persuasive?) [...] This poses a question as to whether we want to include features that are not currently intended for

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:16:09 +0100, Ted Dunning wrote: Does this really add comparisons on average? Or does it only add comparisons on key equality? If the latter the difference is definitely minute. In the particular case ("MathArrays.sortInPlace") the current comparator only compares key

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:10:33 +0100, Sean Owen wrote: You are right that it adds 1 or 2 more branches per comparison. The new Comparator would at least be consistent with equals(), though it probably doesn't matter for correctness in practice. I am interested in closing this minor issue so I su

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

Does this really add comparisons on average? Or does it only add comparisons on key equality? If the latter the difference is definitely minute. Secondly, changing comparator value to include value changes how sets work. Usually, this is good. Occasionally bad. In any case, a change that is r

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 16/10/2013 21:34, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: >>> On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz wrote: On 10/13/13 8:09 AM, James Carman wrote: > Well, it has been 72 hours, so let's tally up the votes. As I s

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

You are right that it adds 1 or 2 more branches per comparison. The new Comparator would at least be consistent with equals(), though it probably doesn't matter for correctness in practice. I am interested in closing this minor issue so I suggest you ignore this part if you guess that this overhea

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 16 Oct 2013, at 22:46, Phil Steitz wrote: On 10/16/13 1:34 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: Further, if the consensus amongst the active developers on a component is that they wish to stick to svn, I see no why that component should be forced to swi

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 09:57:52 +0100, Sean Owen wrote: On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Gilles wrote: I think the Comparator can also replace a custom one in MathArrays. Are you sure? Yes, at least tests pass. There are two anonymous comparator classes there which compare by key. The ne

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 10/16/13 1:34 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: >>> On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz >>> wrote: On 10/13/13 8:09 AM, James Carman wrote: > Well, it has been 72 hours, so let's tally up the votes. As

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

On 14 Oct 2013, at 9:13, Mark Thomas wrote: On 13/10/2013 23:59, sebb wrote: On 13 October 2013 20:47, Phil Steitz wrote: On 10/13/13 8:09 AM, James Carman wrote: Well, it has been 72 hours, so let's tally up the votes. As I see it (counting votes on both lists): +1s James Carman Romain M

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

I also see the test failure. Otherwise, the RC looks good to me, found no other problems. Oliver Tests run: 3, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.043 sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.mail.SimpleEmailTest testDefaultMimeCharset(org.apache.commons.mail.SimpleEmailTest) Ti

[BeanUtils] Generics for BeanComparator

There is another complicated one: BeanComparator implements Comparator in a way that it compares a given property of a specific bean class. The actual comparison is handled by another Comparator stored in a member field. So I am tempted to transform it to BeanComparator where T is the bean class

Re: svn commit: r1532068 - /commons/proper/beanutils/branches/java5/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/DynaBeanMapDecorator.java

Am 16.10.2013 02:04, schrieb sebb: > On 15 October 2013 20:55, Oliver Heger wrote: >> Despite the fact that this is an interesting problem, do generic >> parameters really make sense here? The map provided by the decorator is >> in fact a Map. But because of backwards compatibility >> these parame

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hello Stefan, everything builds fine with: Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 17:22:22+0200) Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apache-maven-3.1.1 Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_40.jdk

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

Hi, I build the tag with: Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17 17:22:22+0200) Maven home: /Applications/dev/maven/apache-maven-3.1.1 Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_40.jdk/Contents/Home/jr

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

Hi Thomas, I have issue when builing on the command line - > mvn clean install Oct 16, 2013 10:39:02 AM org.subethamail.smtp.server.ServerThread run INFO: SMTP server *:2510 stopped emailMessage === Received: from 172.22.120.122 (l

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

My first thought was "We should delete that page". :) On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > Careful there. Hen might suggest making that list dormant. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 16, 2013, at 0:38, Jörg Schaible wrote: > > > BTW: We have already a "challenge" result, i

Re: [LANG] Deprecate time* package?

I'm +1 for that. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > Hen, you have expressed that you thing Java 8 will make the time package > obsolete. Do we want to deprecate it? > > Benedikt > > > -- > http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > http

[LANG] Deprecate time* package?

Hi, Hen, you have expressed that you thing Java 8 will make the time package obsolete. Do we want to deprecate it? Benedikt -- http://people.apache.org/~britter/ http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter http://github.com/britter

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 Phil On 10/15/13 11:26 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi all, > > I've addressed most of the issues brought up during the RC1 vote. I'll > have limited net time the next three days, but hopefully I won't be > needed. > > Stefan > > Compress 1.6 RC2 is available for review here: > https://di

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Gilles wrote: > I think the Comparator can also replace a >> custom one in MathArrays. >> > > Are you sure? > Yes, at least tests pass. There are two anonymous comparator classes there which compare by key. The new Comparator compares by key too (and by value, bu

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 If a new RC is needed I would suggest looking at SevenZOutputFile, there are several chunks of untested code: http://people.apache.org/~bodewig/cc-1.6/site/cobertura/org.apache.commons.compress.archivers.sevenz.SevenZOutputFile.html Emmanuel Bourg Le 15/10/2013 20:26, Stefan Bodewig a écrit

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

+1 for the release from me

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 16 Oct 2013, at 16:28, Gary Gregory wrote: On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two buffer fields it doesn't look so bad (just additions). I believe these two fields are acceptable although I understand

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > [X] +1 Release these artifacts > > > On 16 Oct 2013, at 15:20, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> Thank you Stefan for the new RC. >> > > +1 > > Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two > buffer fields it does

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi, [X] +1 Release these artifacts On 16 Oct 2013, at 15:20, Gary Gregory wrote: Thank you Stefan for the new RC. +1 Maybe I have interpreted the Clirr report wrong. But besides the two buffer fields it doesn't look so bad (just additions). I believe these two fields are acceptable althoug

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC1

I checked out the tag and ran "mvn site" and got a unit test failure: Tests run: 3, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.091 sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.mail.SimpleEmailTest testDefaultMimeCharset(org.apache.commons.mail.SimpleEmailTest) Time elapsed: 0.051 sec <<< FA

Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

Hi All: Thank you Stefan for the new RC. Now that we have a new cleaned up RC, I want to make sure that we understand that, strictly speaking and while unlikely in practice, 1.6-RC2 breaks binary compatibility with 1.5 (see Clirr). I think we started discussing this and after some hand-waving som

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

Ted Dunning wrote: > Careful there. Hen might suggest making that list dormant. Why tyke care, it just reflect the current state then ;-) > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 16, 2013, at 0:38, Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> BTW: We have already a "challenge" result, it's just terribly out of >> d

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

Hi Gilles, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > >> [...] >> >> I had originally used .of() for consistency with Commons Lang (is >> that >> persuasive?) [...] > > This poses a question as to whether we want to include features > that are not currently intended for strictly internal purposes. > The intention w

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

Careful there. Hen might suggest making that list dormant. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 16, 2013, at 0:38, Jörg Schaible wrote: > BTW: We have already a "challenge" result, it's just terribly out of date: > https://wiki.apache.org/commons/CommonsPeople

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

If nobody is willing to put a component to "dormant" state, then the label doesn't make any sense. I would vote to remove the dormant state in general. If we don't have any need of a specific component we can put it to attic.apache.org too. No need to duplicate things. If we don't have a "dorm

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

Hi. [...] I had originally used .of() for consistency with Commons Lang (is that persuasive?) [...] This poses a question as to whether we want to include features that are not currently intended for strictly internal purposes. The intention was certainly not to duplicate what's in Lang. S

Re: [math][lang] LANG-912: Math.sum(int...)

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 02:12:41 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote: Should this issue be in Math? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-912 Perhaps as ArithmeticUtils.addAndCheck(int...) ? Welcome. It would be an easy extension, I think. Regards, Gilles Or should we be thinking of implementing o

[math][lang] LANG-912: Math.sum(int...)

Should this issue be in Math? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-912 Perhaps as ArithmeticUtils.addAndCheck(int...) ? Or should we be thinking of implementing on the Lang side? Hen

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 09:28:54 +0100, Sean Owen wrote: On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: On 10/15/13 2:51 PM, Sean Owen wrote: > Hello all, > > I'd like to propose a few small additions to the Pair class in Common > Math3: a factory method, to avoid redundant generics-relate

Re: [math] Add Pair factory method, toString(), Comparator

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 10/15/13 2:51 PM, Sean Owen wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I'd like to propose a few small additions to the Pair class in Common > > Math3: a factory method, to avoid redundant generics-related > eclarations, a > > toString() method, and a b

Re: [LANG] JIRA management

To your point, this would be best as a JIRA workflow. It doesn't look like we get to edit that by default, so I'm thinking of using versions as a cheap method at first, then if it feels good I'll go work with Infra to figure out how to turn it into a workflow that other Commons components can choos

Re: [Commons Wiki] Update of "ContributorsGroup" by JörgSchaible

On 10/16/2013 09:36 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: Hi Ate, Ate Douma wrote: On 10/16/2013 08:54 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: It seems it is unnecessary for committers to be added here, otherwise I would not have been able to add myself. I don't think so. AFAIK the moinmoin security is not wired into

Re: [Commons Wiki] Update of "ContributorsGroup" by JörgSchaible

Hi Ate, Ate Douma wrote: > On 10/16/2013 08:54 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> >> It seems it is unnecessary for committers to be added here, otherwise I >> would not have been able to add myself. > > I don't think so. AFAIK the moinmoin security is not wired into the ASF > LDAP security system, exc

Re: [Commons Wiki] Update of "ContributorsGroup" by JörgSchaible

On 10/16/2013 08:54 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: It seems it is unnecessary for committers to be added here, otherwise I would not have been able to add myself. I don't think so. AFAIK the moinmoin security is not wired into the ASF LDAP security system, except maybe for (root) admins. The moin