Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC3

+1 let's release it! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Compress 1.6 RC3 is available for review here: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/ > (svn revision 3327) > > Maven artifacts are here: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repos

[VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC3

Compress 1.6 RC3 is available for review here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/ (svn revision 3327) Maven artifacts are here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-ABC/org/apache/commons/commons-compress/1.6/ Details of chan

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-22, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig >> wrote: at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential backwards incompa

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Duncan Jones wrote: > On 22 October 2013 21:07, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Matt Benson > wrote: > > > >> So what is having a non-generic runtime class accomplishing for you? > >> > > > > The subclass "is a kind of" pair AND it is do

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On 22 October 2013 21:07, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > >> So what is having a non-generic runtime class accomplishing for you? >> > > The subclass "is a kind of" pair AND it is domain typed to my app. > > Gary Sebb is correct - composition would wor

Re: [VOTE] Release Imaging 1.0 from RC4

Am 22.10.2013, 13:20 Uhr, schrieb sebb : Ah yes, the Apache parent pom has a release profile, but it does not quite do what Commons needs That's why the CP release profile was created. There is a "useReleaseProfile" property which you can set to "false" in the pom/configuration to make sure i

Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1

Am 22.10.2013 18:48, schrieb Gary Gregory: > Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;) > > I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it. > > -1 > > The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version: 1.10". > > This is because the POM still says 1.1

Re: [lang] Issue focus

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Hen, > > first of all: Thanks for the incredible job you did over the last few days > by sorting through all the issues. > > We have two issues left which are marked for 3.2, none of those is > critical. Both can be fixed to later. F

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > So what is having a non-generic runtime class accomplishing for you? > The subclass "is a kind of" pair AND it is domain typed to my app. Gary > > Matt > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Gary Gregory >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sent via

Re: svn commit: r1533967 - in /commons/proper/beanutils/branches/java5/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/ test/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/

Am 22.10.2013 20:02, schrieb sebb: > On 20 October 2013 21:28, wrote: >> Author: oheger >> Date: Sun Oct 20 20:28:19 2013 >> New Revision: 1533967 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1533967 >> Log: >> Generified all number converters. >> >> Modified: >> >> commons/proper/beanutils/branches/ja

Re: svn commit: r1532011 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3: ArrayUtils.java ObjectUtils.java

On 22 October 2013 20:55, Matt Benson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:49 PM, sebb wrote: > >> On 21 October 2013 20:28, Henri Yandell wrote: >> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:29 AM, sebb wrote: >> > >> >> On 21 October 2013 11:52, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Send from my mob

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

So what is having a non-generic runtime class accomplishing for you? Matt On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone > > Original message > From: sebb > Date:10/22/2013 13:37 (GMT-05:00) > To: Com

Re: svn commit: r1534734 - in /commons/proper/imaging/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/imaging: formats/jpeg/decoder/ formats/png/ formats/png/chunks/ formats/psd/ formats/tiff/write/ icc/ palet

On 22 October 2013 20:07, wrote: > Author: damjan > Date: Tue Oct 22 19:07:12 2013 > New Revision: 1534734 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534734 > Log: > Encapsulate more public mutable arrays. > > Jira issue key: IMAGING-117 > > > Modified: > > commons/proper/imaging/trunk/src/main/java/o

Re: svn commit: r1532011 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3: ArrayUtils.java ObjectUtils.java

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:49 PM, sebb wrote: > On 21 October 2013 20:28, Henri Yandell wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:29 AM, sebb wrote: > > > >> On 21 October 2013 11:52, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > Send from my mobile device > >> > > >> >> Am 21.10.2013 um 03:46 schrieb

Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Email 1.3.2 based on RC2

Hello Thomas, my environment: 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/Hom

Re: svn commit: r1532011 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3: ArrayUtils.java ObjectUtils.java

On 21 October 2013 20:28, Henri Yandell wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:29 AM, sebb wrote: > >> On 21 October 2013 11:52, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> > >> > >> > Send from my mobile device >> > >> >> Am 21.10.2013 um 03:46 schrieb sebb : >> >> >> >>> On 20 October 2013 15:03, Benedikt Ritter w

Re: [lang] Issue focus

Hello Hen, first of all: Thanks for the incredible job you did over the last few days by sorting through all the issues. We have two issues left which are marked for 3.2, none of those is critical. Both can be fixed to later. Following release early, release often I think we should just fix the F

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone Original message From: sebb Date:10/22/2013 13:37 (GMT-05:00) To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final On 22 October 2013 18:33, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:2

Re: svn commit: r1534380 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/NotImplementedException.java test/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/NotImplementedExceptionTest.java

Hi Hen, 2013/10/21 > Author: bayard > Date: Mon Oct 21 21:24:47 2013 > New Revision: 1534380 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534380 > Log: > Returning NotImplementedException to Lang after it was removed in Lang 3.0 > per the request in LANG-769. > > Added: > > commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/ma

Re: svn commit: r1532011 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3: ArrayUtils.java ObjectUtils.java

Well your comment makes sense anyway... 2013/10/21 Henri Yandell > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Henri Yandell > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:29 AM, sebb wrote: > > > >> On 21 October 2013 11:52, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > Send from my mobile device

Re: [maven build] Jira report?

2013/10/22 sebb > On 22 October 2013 19:40, Henri Yandell wrote: > > Anyone know what the point of the JIRA report is? > > > > It seems to be much like the changes report, but with less active > > authorship and a confusing inclusion of resolved issues for different > > versions. > > > > I'm won

Re: [maven build] Jira report?

On 22 October 2013 19:40, Henri Yandell wrote: > Anyone know what the point of the JIRA report is? > > It seems to be much like the changes report, but with less active > authorship and a confusing inclusion of resolved issues for different > versions. > > I'm wondering why we include it. The cha

[maven build] Jira report?

Anyone know what the point of the JIRA report is? It seems to be much like the changes report, but with less active authorship and a confusing inclusion of resolved issues for different versions. I'm wondering why we include it. Hen

Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1

On 22 October 2013 11:10, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...] > > Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9. > > So I would like to release configuration 1.10. > > Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here: > https://di

Re: svn commit: r1533967 - in /commons/proper/beanutils/branches/java5/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/ test/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/converters/

On 20 October 2013 21:28, wrote: > Author: oheger > Date: Sun Oct 20 20:28:19 2013 > New Revision: 1533967 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1533967 > Log: > Generified all number converters. > > Modified: > > commons/proper/beanutils/branches/java5/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/c

Re: svn commit: r1534537 - /commons/proper/configuration/branches/CONFIGURATION_1_X_MAINTENANCE/NOTICE.txt

On 22 October 2013 09:21, wrote: > Author: henning > Date: Tue Oct 22 08:21:49 2013 > New Revision: 1534537 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534537 > Log: > it is 2013 already > > backport from r1534458. > > > Modified: > > commons/proper/configuration/branches/CONFIGURATION_1_X_MAINTENANCE/

Re: svn commit: r1534558 - /commons/proper/configuration/branches/RELEASE_1_10_BRANCH/pom.xml

On 22 October 2013 10:29, wrote: > Author: henning > Date: Tue Oct 22 09:29:28 2013 > New Revision: 1534558 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534558 > Log: > revert findbugs and checkstyle versions back Why? It would be helpful to add comments to the pom to explain why the older versions are req

Re: svn commit: r1534568 - /commons/proper/configuration/branches/RELEASE_1_10_BRANCH/pom.xml

2013/10/22 : > Author: henning > Date: Tue Oct 22 09:40:33 2013 > New Revision: 1534568 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534568 > Log: > [maven-release-plugin] prepare release CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1 > > Modified: > commons/proper/configuration/branches/RELEASE_1_10_BRANCH/pom.xml > > Modified:

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

FTFY: Any reason we would want to keep ImmutablePair? On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > Is there any reason we would want to keep ImmutablePair final? > > Gary > > -- > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second

Re: svn commit: r1534546 - in /commons/sandbox/monitoring/trunk: ./ aop/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/monitoring/aop/ core/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/monitoring/counters/ jdbc/ jpa/ jpa/src/

On 22 October 2013 10:07, wrote: > Author: rmannibucau > Date: Tue Oct 22 09:07:48 2013 > New Revision: 1534546 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1534546 > Log: > adding jpa module - doc todo > > Added: > commons/sandbox/monitoring/trunk/jpa/ > commons/sandbox/monitoring/trunk/jpa/pom.xml >

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Paul Benedict > wrote: > > > If you can subclass, the class will likely be mutable somehow (accessing > > protected or package-private data?) -- even introducing new variables > > exclusive to the subclass. T

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On 22 October 2013 18:33, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: > >> If you can subclass, the class will likely be mutable somehow (accessing >> protected or package-private data?) -- even introducing new variables >> exclusive to the subclass. The "final" ke

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: > If you can subclass, the class will likely be mutable somehow (accessing > protected or package-private data?) -- even introducing new variables > exclusive to the subclass. The "final" keyword is used well here. > Here is my use case for w

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On 22 October 2013 18:21, Matt Benson wrote: > Here's the thread where the issue was discussed before: > > http://markmail.org/thread/fcbesctp6ifxtecs > > As for the public fields, it was originally my intent that any Pair be > immutable, and my take on final fields is that there is no reason not

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

If you can subclass, the class will likely be mutable somehow (accessing protected or package-private data?) -- even introducing new variables exclusive to the subclass. The "final" keyword is used well here. On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:15 PM, sebb wrote: > On 22 October 2013 18:10, Gary Gregory

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

Here's the thread where the issue was discussed before: http://markmail.org/thread/fcbesctp6ifxtecs As for the public fields, it was originally my intent that any Pair be immutable, and my take on final fields is that there is no reason not to make them public, particularly if, as in the case of

Re: [lang] ImmutablePair is final

On 22 October 2013 18:10, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > Is there any reason we would want to keep ImmutablePair final? To stop mutable subclasses from being created? BTW, it's unfortunate that the fields are public; they should have been private (there are public getters). > Gary > > -- > E

[lang] ImmutablePair is final

Hi All: Is there any reason we would want to keep ImmutablePair final? Gary -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition JUnit in Action, Second Edition Spring Batch in

Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1

Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;) I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it. -1 The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version: 1.10". This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10. This would also explain this: [WARNI

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig > wrote: > > >> at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential > >> backwards incompatible change as well. > > > OK, sounds

Re: svn commit: r1534322 - in /commons/proper/imaging/trunk/src: changes/changes.xml main/java/org/apache/commons/imaging/formats/jpeg/JpegImageParser.java main/java/org/apache/commons/imaging/formats

On 22 October 2013 05:49, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:02 AM, sebb wrote: >>> + >>> +public byte[] getComment() { >>> +return comment; >> >> This is better, but the array can still be modified externally. >> >> Might make more sense to convert the array to a Str

Re: [CANCELLED VOTE] Release Compress 1.6 based on RC2

On 2013-10-21, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> at the same time I'll update the release notes to reflect the potential >> backwards incompatible change as well. > OK, sounds good. I'll look forward to the next RC. See http://svn.apache.org/r1534

Re: svn commit: r1534216 - /commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/pom.xml

On 22 October 2013 08:50, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2013-10-22, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 22/10/2013 08:12, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >>> Le 22/10/2013 00:33, Mark Thomas a écrit : On 21/10/2013 23:31, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Thatis using Fileupload as a noun which isn't the correct usage

Re: [VOTE] Release Imaging 1.0 from RC4

On 22 October 2013 07:50, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:33 AM, sebb wrote: > > [...] > > source-release.zip may be spurious. >> > > These files get created when running > > mvn -DdryRun release:prepare > > instead of > > mvn -Prelease -DdryRun release:prepare > > The f

Re: [CONFIGURATION] trying an RC release

On 22 October 2013 07:29, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:20 PM, sebb wrote: > [...] > >> I don't like the release plugin; I think it is badly designed [1] so I >> don't use it; so I cannot help with it. >> >> [1] https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRELEASE-845 > > > If th

[VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1

[haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...] Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9. So I would like to release configuration 1.10. Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn revision 3321

Re: svn commit: r1534322 - in /commons/proper/imaging/trunk/src: changes/changes.xml main/java/org/apache/commons/imaging/formats/jpeg/JpegImageParser.java main/java/org/apache/commons/imaging/formats

You could wrap it in a Java NIO read only ByteBuffer, but for small data this might not safe much as it is an additional object instance and You need to keep the backing Array unmodified. Greetings Bernd > Am 22.10.2013 um 06:49 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic : > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:02 AM, s

Re: svn commit: r1534216 - /commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/pom.xml

On 2013-10-22, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 22/10/2013 08:12, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> Le 22/10/2013 00:33, Mark Thomas a écrit : >>> On 21/10/2013 23:31, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >>> Thatis using Fileupload as a noun which isn't the correct usage of the >>> trademark. >> But how is it different from "A

Re: svn commit: r1534216 - /commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/pom.xml

On 22/10/2013 08:12, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 22/10/2013 00:33, Mark Thomas a écrit : >> On 21/10/2013 23:31, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> >> Thatis using Fileupload as a noun which isn't the correct usage of the >> trademark. > > But how is it different from "Apache Tomcat" or "Apache Qpid"? We don

Re: svn commit: r1534216 - /commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/pom.xml

Le 22/10/2013 00:33, Mark Thomas a écrit : > On 21/10/2013 23:31, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > Thatis using Fileupload as a noun which isn't the correct usage of the > trademark. But how is it different from "Apache Tomcat" or "Apache Qpid"? We don't say "The Apache Tomcat component" or "The Apache