On 3/1/2014 9:33 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
I don't like the idea of creating some kind of component hierarchy, where
components higher up may depend on lower levels libs. This should be
decided for every individual case.
I agree. If I just want some basic low-level library, I don't want it to
On 2014-03-02, sebb wrote:
> On 1 March 2014 19:53, Matt Benson wrote:
>> I've said it before: doocracy. If someone wants to take on the work to
>> provide 1.5 support, they've widened the audience of the component, which
>> should be seen as a win if it didn't cause anyone else a problem.
> Whi
On 1 March 2014 19:53, Matt Benson wrote:
> I've said it before: doocracy. If someone wants to take on the work to
> provide 1.5 support, they've widened the audience of the component, which
> should be seen as a win if it didn't cause anyone else a problem.
Which is what I just did; I fixed the
Thanks for the positive and supportive feedback Matt and Benedikt!
I'll now also assume lazy consensus from the others here and start with
executing according to my proposal.
You can expect some major cleanup and removal of outdated features, including
documentation, for SCXML shortly...
Re
On 02-03-14 00:02, a...@apache.org wrote:
Author: ate
Date: Sat Mar 1 23:02:28 2014
New Revision: 899664
Log:
Site checkin for project Apache Commons SCXML
This turned out to be an unexpected large site checkin ...
I only fixed a few menu items, so I expected a minor update.
Turned out, the
Am 01.03.2014 18:37, schrieb Benedikt Ritter:
> Hi Simo,
>
> this is a nice idea, and I think it's doable for parts of the API. The
> problem is, that it may require a lot of work and I don't see anybody who
> has the time to do this currently :-) But if you jump into this, I think I
> can help ou
I've said it before: doocracy. If someone wants to take on the work to
provide 1.5 support, they've widened the audience of the component, which
should be seen as a win if it didn't cause anyone else a problem. Maybe we
should have a [compatibility] component to capture these backports in a
reusabl
And just to add fuel to the fire and ensure every possible opinion is
represented, I agree with Gary, but would support shading after the fact to
reduce the dependency requirements.
Matt
On Mar 1, 2014 1:38 PM, "Paul Benedict" wrote:
> I recommend copying the source of the Commons Lang classes y
I recommend copying the source of the Commons Lang classes you use and
maintain it privately. It is only two classes, right?
On Mar 1, 2014 12:51 PM, "André Diermann" wrote:
> But will upgrading to 1.7 will solve the core "issue", that some features
> (in detail: Assertions, MethodUitl and TypeUt
But will upgrading to 1.7 will solve the core "issue", that some features
(in detail: Assertions, MethodUitl and TypeUtil) are copied subsets of
already implemented features in other Commons projects?
>From what I can see commons.lang3 is already referenced by BU2 (although
it's currently only use
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> I don't like the idea of creating some kind of component hierarchy, where
> components higher up may depend on lower levels libs. This should be
> decided for every individual case.
>
> In the case of BU2 I'd say it's better to change the
Hi Simo,
this is a nice idea, and I think it's doable for parts of the API. The
problem is, that it may require a lot of work and I don't see anybody who
has the time to do this currently :-) But if you jump into this, I think I
can help out here and there when I find the time.
Regards,
Benedikt
Hello Barry,
no, there is currently nobody working on BCEL. If you need the release you
should look through the open issues in Jira and propose fixes, so that we
can get BCEL 6 out of the door.
Benedikt
2014-03-01 13:29 GMT+01:00 Barry Zhong :
> Dear guys,
>
> It's really nice to hear any thin
If it's only test code, I'm hesitant to move to Java 6. Are there
improvements for production code as well?
Benedikt
2014-03-01 17:54 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory :
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
> > +1 to stop bothering with Java 5 for all our components.
> >
>
> +1 :)
>
I don't like the idea of creating some kind of component hierarchy, where
components higher up may depend on lower levels libs. This should be
decided for every individual case.
In the case of BU2 I'd say it's better to change the language level
requirement to 1.7. We could use Objects.notNull.
Ot
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> +1 to stop bothering with Java 5 for all our components.
>
+1 :)
Gary
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For addit
Simon, that makes totally sense to me :) ..that's why I also often struggle
to use StringUtils for instance... but it starts with only one method and
after some time I find myself in having copied a lot of methods.
That's why I like Gary's idea too. Regarding BU2, MethodUtil and TypeUtil
are also
+1 to stop bothering with Java 5 for all our components.
Emmanuel Bourg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Environment:
Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da;
2013-02-19 14:51:28+0100)
Maven home: D:\data\tools\apache-maven-3.0.5\bin\..
Java version: 1.7.0_40, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_40\jre
Default locale: de_DE, platform encoding: Cp1
I should clarify that I see components like [io] and [lang] as lower level
than [beanutils] for example.
Gary
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> My preference would be for components like [io] and [lang] to be reused
> from other components as a dependency in order to avoid
My preference would be for components like [io] and [lang] to be reused
from other components as a dependency in order to avoid this kind of
duplication.
Gary
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:27 AM, André Diermann wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that the majority (all?) functionality of the Assertions c
Salut André,
to avoid to depend to an external lib just to get benefit of 3 methods :)
Best,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 5:27 PM, André Diermann wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that the majority (all?) functionality of t
Hello,
I noticed that the majority (all?) functionality of the Assertions class is
already covert by commons-lang Validate [1].
For instance Assertions.checkNotNull() is an equivalent to
Validate.notNull().
Is there a reason for this?
Regards,
André
[1]
http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons
On 1 March 2014 16:13, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Shouldn't a try/finally clause be used here?
I don't think it's necessary to tidyup test code that fails, because
the intention is that test code does not generally fail.
But it's not a good idea if successful test code leaks resources, as
that could p
Shouldn't a try/finally clause be used here?
Or, move to Java 7 after 3.3 and use try-with-resources all over.
I know this is test code... but I am sure there are plenty of other bullet
proofing opportunities.
Gary
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:11 AM, wrote:
> Author: sebb
> Date: Sat Mar 1 16:
On 2014-03-01, sebb wrote:
> On 1 March 2014 05:57, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On 2014-02-28, wrote:
>>> Add serialVersionUID
>> to a private inner class that is a subclass of HashMap.
>> Why?
> Eclipse complained; it won't do any harm.
Sure not, I was just curious to learn something new.
S
Dear guys,
It’s really nice to hear any thing about BCEL.
Does that mean that BCEL 6.0 is going to be available on Maven?
Best Regards,
Barry
On Mar 1, 2014, at 7:25 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 2014-02-18 19:07 GMT+01:00 Benedikt Ritter :
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-02-18 19:01 GMT+01:00 Gary Greg
On 1 March 2014 11:51, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 2014-03-01 12:46 GMT+01:00 sebb :
>
>> On 1 March 2014 02:09, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:29 PM, wrote:
>> >
>> >> Author: sebb
>> >> Date: Fri Feb 28 19:29:12 2014
>> >> New Revision: 1573038
>> >>
>> >> URL: http://svn.apac
Hi all mates,
even if in a stealth mode, I still lurk the ML - unfortunately my recent
task at $work didn't let me so much energies/spare time for my hobbies
projects.
I really feel sorry for the abandoned status of BU2 but I just had the idea
to port, in a separate package, the fluent APIs to BU
On 1 March 2014 09:24, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hello Gary,
>
>
> 2014-02-28 15:32 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory :
>
>> Builds OK from src zip, sig and m5 OK with:
>>
>> Apache Maven 3.2.1 (ea8b2b07643dbb1b84b6d16e1f08391b666bc1e9;
>> 2014-02-14T12:37:52-05:00)
>> Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.2.1\b
2014-03-01 12:46 GMT+01:00 sebb :
> On 1 March 2014 02:09, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:29 PM, wrote:
> >
> >> Author: sebb
> >> Date: Fri Feb 28 19:29:12 2014
> >> New Revision: 1573038
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1573038
> >> Log:
> >> Arrays#copyOfRange is Java
On 1 March 2014 05:57, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2014-02-28, wrote:
>
>> Add serialVersionUID
>
> to a private inner class that is a subclass of HashMap.
>
> Why?
Eclipse complained; it won't do any harm.
> Stefan
-
To unsubs
On 1 March 2014 02:09, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:29 PM, wrote:
>
>> Author: sebb
>> Date: Fri Feb 28 19:29:12 2014
>> New Revision: 1573038
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1573038
>> Log:
>> Arrays#copyOfRange is Java 1.6+; replace with basic local implementation
>>
>> Ugh
2014-02-18 19:07 GMT+01:00 Benedikt Ritter :
>
>
>
> 2014-02-18 19:01 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory :
>
> Well done.
>>
>> I pushed BCEL last site but I do not see it.
>>
>
> Maybe it need some time to sync? Don't know...
>
I had a look at this again. Some of the components (including bcel and vfs)
had
Hello Gary,
2014-02-28 15:32 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory :
> Builds OK from src zip, sig and m5 OK with:
>
> Apache Maven 3.2.1 (ea8b2b07643dbb1b84b6d16e1f08391b666bc1e9;
> 2014-02-14T12:37:52-05:00)
> Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.2.1\bin\..
> Java version: 1.7.0_51, vendor: Oracle Corporation
35 matches
Mail list logo
