Hi,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> Is there anything to be done for jira?
Well, that's a question I also had. So far we have been using COMMONSRDF as
Jira key. All the current components simply use the component name a key
[1] (e.g., LANG). I already requested the change
Oh that's a pretty decent advantage there actually.
On 29 November 2016 at 22:07, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> > That's pretty neat. So it looks like two competing styles of annotations
> > here would be separate annotations for each concern, a s
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> That's pretty neat. So it looks like two competing styles of annotations
> here would be separate annotations for each concern, a single annotation
> with an enum, or even separate annotations with boolean values or enums
> (though that gets a
That's pretty neat. So it looks like two competing styles of annotations
here would be separate annotations for each concern, a single annotation
with an enum, or even separate annotations with boolean values or enums
(though that gets a little more complex come to think of it).
If only the JDK ha
Is there anything to be done for jira? Also, don't forget to update the scm
URLs in the pom file.
On 28 November 2016 at 05:35, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> The Commons RDF graduation vote passed on Commons and Incubator, so
> Commons RDF will now formally move to become a component of Apache
>
What if a feature was added to the maven-release-plugin to release a subset
of submodules? I wonder how feasible that would be.
On 28 November 2016 at 19:00, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Gilles wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:31:36 -0700, Apache wrote:
> >> Gilles,
> >>
> >> If you try to do this
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Eric Barnhill
wrote:
> I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather than
> in the commons-complex JIRA.
>
> The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
>
> -- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.)
-- commons-m
And an example:
/**
* HTTP/2 compatible extension of {@link RequestConnControl}.
*
* @since 5.0
*/
@Contract(threading = ThreadingBehavior.IMMUTABLE)
public class H2RequestConnControl extends RequestConnControl {
...
Gary
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
> FYI, this is
FYI, this is how we're going to do it in HttpComponents 5:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpcomponents/httpcore/trunk/httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/annotation/ThreadingBehavior.java
Gary
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Be
Github user garydgregory commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/commons-fileupload/pull/5
Don't you still get an NPE if you call DiskFileItem.isInMemory()?
You should really have one @Test method for each DiskFileItem method you
modified to show where NPEs have been
Hi.
This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC5).
Main changes wrt the preceding vote (RC2, on September 16) are:
* Modularization
* Non-uniform deviates (in module "commons-rng-sampling")
Tag name:
RNG_1_0_RC5 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')
T
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> I agree with Oliver. I don't think we have consensus about if and how we
> want to implement this. Does it even make sense to try to document this?
> What value does such a documentation have, when it is wrong 50% of the
> time? I just sum
> On Nov 29, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
> +1 for an early release without the name parser. We can implement the
> algorithms from the book in 1.1.
Sounds good I’ll start heading that direction.
-Rob
>
> Benedikt
>
> Gary Gregory schrieb am Di. 29. Nov. 2016 um 00:34:
>
>>
+1 for an early release without the name parser. We can implement the
algorithms from the book in 1.1.
Benedikt
Gary Gregory schrieb am Di. 29. Nov. 2016 um 00:34:
> +1 to removing the human name code for 1.0. Put it in a branch IMO.
>
> Gary
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Bruno P. Kinosh
I agree with Oliver. I don't think we have consensus about if and how we
want to implement this. Does it even make sense to try to document this?
What value does such a documentation have, when it is wrong 50% of the
time? I just sumed up the feedback I got from one (!) user at the
conference. I th
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
>
>
> Am 28.11.2016 um 22:28 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> > WRT licensing, I re-implemented the annotations in git master. Notice
> that
> > all Javadocs are different and much simpler for now. Feel free to write
> > more.
>
> As the length of this
On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 12:26:53 -0800, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Jörg Schaible
wrote:
Hi Eric,
Eric Barnhill wrote:
> I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here
rather
than
> in the commons-complex JIRA.
>
> The Complex library has multiple dep
Am 28.11.2016 um 22:28 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> WRT licensing, I re-implemented the annotations in git master. Notice that
> all Javadocs are different and much simpler for now. Feel free to write
> more.
As the length of this thread shows, using annotations for the purpose of
documenting thread-
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Jörg Schaible
wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> Eric Barnhill wrote:
>
> > I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather
> than
> > in the commons-complex JIRA.
> >
> > The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
> >
> > -- common
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Eric Barnhill
wrote:
> I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather than
> in the commons-complex JIRA.
>
> The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
>
> -- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.)
> -- commons-
Hello Eric.
On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 14:19:54 +0100, Eric Barnhill wrote:
I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather
than
in the commons-complex JIRA.
The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
-- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.)
Do y
Hi Eric,
Eric Barnhill wrote:
> I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather than
> in the commons-complex JIRA.
>
> The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
>
> -- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.)
> -- commons-math exceptions
> -- c
I thought it would be good to raise a structural question here rather than
in the commons-complex JIRA.
The Complex library has multiple dependencies on three packages:
-- commons-math base classes (e.g. Field et al.)
-- commons-math exceptions
-- commons-math util (numerous classes)
Otherwise i
Changed sandbox folder name to "sigproc".
Eric
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Bernd Porr wrote:
>
> > Hi Gilles,
> >
> > I like the idea of "SigProc". Filter is a bit too narrow especially when
> > we also include more exoctic processin
Github user OleHornischer commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/commons-fileupload/pull/5
Thanks for the tip. I updated my repository in accordance to the script on
the linked blog post.
Hope things are in order now.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
25 matches
Mail list logo
