Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

+1 Gary On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > All, > > Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2). > > Maven repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1166 > Artifacts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/com

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

Yes, that's correct. I'm now +1 (non-binding) -- Sean Busbey On May 16, 2016 13:44, "Josh Elser" wrote: > Sean, > > Circling back around on the discussions today about Jackrabbit's NOTICE > file, this would change your -1 vote, yes? > > Sean Busbey wrote: > >> -1 (non-binding) >> >> bad: >> >>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

Thanks Bernd and Jörg for your votes so far! By my tally, we're one (binding) vote away from passing this! Gary or Sebb, any chance either of you could cast a vote (I assume this fell by the wayside when we thought there were issues with the NOTICE file)? sebb wrote: On 17 May 2016 at 17:57,

RE: [CRYPTO] High level API for Common crypto

Hi Giorgio, Sure please fire JIRA if you like. Folks can discuss in the JIRA. -Original Message- From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:23 PM To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [CRYPTO] High level API for Common crypto Hello Heighen, I ex

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

On 17 May 2016 at 17:57, Bernd wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks Josh! > > This is a binding +1 > > (however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another > RC or before releasing the repo): > > > 2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser : > >> All, >> >> Please consider the following for

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

Hello, Thanks Josh! This is a binding +1 (however I have some minor optional points which could be fixed in another RC or before releasing the repo): 2016-05-12 5:29 GMT+02:00 Josh Elser : > All, > > Please consider the following for Apache Commons VFS2 version 2.1 (rc2). > > Maven repository

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2

Hi, built this version from source the tarball. IBM JDK' still fail, but it seems caused by a test making wrong assumptions (see VFS-500). Built with JDK 9 fails because of failure with jar plugin. However, all tests pass previously. Therefore: +1 Cheers, Jörg Josh Elser wrote: > All, > >

[Math] How to test "SecureRandom" (Was: [Math] Change on branch "develop": [...] Failing)

Hi. On Tue, 17 May 2016 14:18:28 + (UTC), Apache Jenkins Server wrote: The Apache Jenkins build system has built Commons Math DeveloperBranch (build #17) Status: Still Failing Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Commons%20Math%20DeveloperBranch/17/ to view the results.

Re: [Math] Design of "o.a.c.m.stat.descriptive.moment"

Hello. On Mon, 16 May 2016 16:42:12 -0700, michael.brzustow...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Giles, I ran into the same problem. Many months ago I asked about higher order moments in Multivariate Stats. I pulled the code and implemented third and fourth order moments in MVStats. I had to "unprotect" so

Re: [VFS] NOTICE required for Jackrabbit's JcrUtils? (was: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2)

See https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Zk01ufa8icmfvo8 It should be Jackrabbit who best decides what is covered by what in the NOTICE file; however evidence so far is strongly showing JcrUtils to be IP clean not needing any NOTICE; and so I would suggest continuing with the RC2 vote as is. If Ja

Re: [Math] Proposal: Add smoothing and fitting to the Kalman Filter

Hi. On Tue, 17 May 2016 12:47:59 +0100, Daniel Winterstein wrote: Thanks Gilles This is a new feature, but extends an existing class. Should I target version 3.7 or version 4.0 of commons.math? 4.0 By the way, what are the key differences in version 4 of commons.math? For several months,

Re: [Math] Proposal: Add smoothing and fitting to the Kalman Filter

Thanks Gilles This is a new feature, but extends an existing class. Should I target version 3.7 or version 4.0 of commons.math? By the way, what are the key differences in version 4 of commons.math? Thank you, - Daniel On 16 May 2016 at 17:48, Gilles wrote: > Hi. > > On Mon, 16 May 2016 14:40

[Math] IntegerSequence

Hi. Quoting from another thread: I have a related story. There is a class in commons-math 4.0 called IntegerRange. Stylistically I much prefer Iterating over such a range than C style loops and was ready to convert. However I found it many times slower, at least in not terribly rigorous home

Re: [ALL] Performance of foreach loop with arrays.

On 17 May 2016 at 06:04, Eric Barnhill wrote: > I have a related story. There is a class in commons-math 4.0 called > IntegerRange. Stylistically I much prefer Iterating over such a range than > C style loops and was ready to convert. However I found it many times > slower, at least in not terribl

Re: [ALL] Performance of foreach loop with arrays.

Sorry one further comment. While I like iterators stylistically, in the design process I have generally chosen to stick with C style loops. This is because, often later in the design process, I decide I want access to the index after all for some reason, and at point it is easier to call the inde