RE: [Crypto] GCM pull request

@kexianda I'm not interested in streaming encryption. I don't think it must be a requirement for the PR to be merged or for the lib to be released. Straight encryption is good enough for me.If any, I'd like to ask for optimized RSA encryption/signing, assuming openssl is faster than jce and/or b

RE: [Crypto] GCM pull request

Hi folks, I had a glance at the implementation of GCM Acceleration in HotSpot(Java 9) and did benchmark months ago. The implementation in HotSpot(Java 9) is not well optimized. Yes, there is an optimization opportunity for Java 9... AES-GCM(JDK8): 3.98 MB/s AES-GCM(JDK9): 267.78 M

Re: [IMAGING] Why don't we just release it?

If you dig through the mailing list, you will find a few proposal for a road map out of "0.97" land. IIRC, the code was deemed in flux and BC breaking changes planned. For me, It's fine to cut 1.0 and to NOT be shy about releasing a 2.0 with BC breaks. Gary On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Bened

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Gary, > > > Am 17.05.2017 um 14:44 schrieb Gary Gregory : > > > > I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the src zip does not build 'mvn > > site' because it is missing a checkstyle file: > > > > [INFO] > > -

Re: [FUNCTOR] How do we move on?

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Gary, > > > Am 17.05.2017 um 15:01 schrieb Gary Gregory : > > > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Benedikt Ritter > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Functor was a nice idea back in 2011, but I think we

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

I think that we could, as a community test of interest, say something like, if Oliver wants to push out what is in trunk in the next 30 days or so (or 60 or 90), we will help. I would help with odds and ends. Aside from that, if no one cares enough to "do", then let's hibernate it. Gary On Wed, M

Re: [IMAGING] Why don't we just release it?

> On May 17, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hi, > > Imaging's inception year is 2007. It has left the incubator around 2009. > There hasn’t been a release under the Apache Commons umbrella, for various > reason. I think we gave the initial contributors a hard time because we >

Re: [Crypto] GCM pull request

AES GCM Acceleration (Counter Intrinsic and Ghash Intrinsic) is in the SUN JCE Provider in Java 9 and some improvements in Java 8u50. An alternative would be NSS. However it is certainly good to have a alternative high speed implementation. http://bugs.java.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8069072 Flori

[Crypto] GCM pull request

Hi,I'm new to this group so I might not be doing this right. I'm very interested in the GCM PR #60 for commons-crypto. It seems like it's the only way to get hw-accelerated encryption for gcm in java (correct me if I'm wrong and you know a better way).  What's the merge process? How does it get r

Re: [IMAGING] Why don't we just release it?

I know nothing imaging, but in principle I agree. If the code is useful, release it. Do not hold back forever. Am 17.05.2017 um 23:22 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: Hi, Imaging's inception year is 2007. It has left the incubator around 2009. There hasn’t been a release under the Apache Commons umbr

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

I believe one of the entries should have been for "LANG-1320: LocaleUtils#toLocale does not support language followed by UN M.49 numeric-3 area code followed by variant". Am 17.05.2017 um 18:26 schrieb Gary Gregory: Not a blocker but LANG-1312 is mentioned twice in the release notes txt file.

Re: [IMAGING] Why don't we just release it?

> On May 17, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hi, > > Imaging's inception year is 2007. It has left the incubator around 2009. > There hasn’t been a release under the Apache Commons umbrella, for various > reason. I think we gave the initial contributors a hard time because we >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

On 17 May 2017 at 21:44, Benedikt Ritter wrote: >> Automatic-Module-Name: org.apache.commons.lang3 >> >> This allows other projects to safely depend on [lang3]. Ultimately, >> we'll have to add a module-info, but this is a much simpler first >> step. > > It’s nice to see you being more active at C

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

That no vote only delays Jigsaw a month. We'll see what happens when they vote again. On 17 May 2017 at 15:44, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hello Stephen, > > > Am 17.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Stephen Colebourne >: > > > > Not sure when the next planned release is, but it might be worth > > adding t

[IMAGING] Why don't we just release it?

Hi, Imaging's inception year is 2007. It has left the incubator around 2009. There hasn’t been a release under the Apache Commons umbrella, for various reason. I think we gave the initial contributors a hard time because we focused to much on code instead of community. Imaging is out there. Peo

Re: [ALL] Build Javadoc with Java 9

Hi, > Am 17.05.2017 um 15:25 schrieb Gary Gregory : > > Hi All: > > I wonder if we should build all of our Javadocs for our sites with Java 9 > since it provides nice new features like searchable Javadocs and HTML5. > Notice the search box on the page > http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/ap

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

Hello Stephen, > Am 17.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Stephen Colebourne : > > Not sure when the next planned release is, but it might be worth > adding the proposed entry in MANIFEST.MF for modules. It isn't > guaranteed to be in the final JDK 9, but my best guess is that it > won't change now. It wou

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

Hello Gary, > Am 17.05.2017 um 14:44 schrieb Gary Gregory : > > I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the src zip does not build 'mvn > site' because it is missing a checkstyle file: > > [INFO] > > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE >

Re: [FUNCTOR] How do we move on?

Hello Gary, > Am 17.05.2017 um 15:01 schrieb Gary Gregory : > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Benedikt Ritter > > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Functor was a nice idea back in 2011, but I think we promoted it to proper >> prematurely. In the light of Java 8 and it’s func

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

Hey guys, this is just the reaction I’m looking for. I think it is important to poke in the hole every once in a while and see if anybody is still interested in a component. If you have intends to work on Jelly, there is no reason to move it to dormant. I’ll wait for the 72 hours to pass anywa

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

Ditto for my -1. I've always wanted to move Jenkins fork patches back to Jelly, but last time I worked on it Mavenizing the project and its components took too much time. Bruno Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:34, Oliver Heger wrote: Hm, being a user of Jelly, I

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

Hm, being a user of Jelly, I have the long-term goal to contribute to the project because I have indeed some itch to scratch, but unfortunately never got to it. So I am -1, but I cannot promise that I can work on Jelly in the near future. Oliver Am 17.05.2017 um 20:26 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: >

[ALL] Build Javadoc with Java 9

Hi All: I wonder if we should build all of our Javadocs for our sites with Java 9 since it provides nice new features like searchable Javadocs and HTML5. Notice the search box on the page http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/overview-summary.html Gary -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com |

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

+1 Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > I think we should move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant for the following > reasons: > > - Jelly hasn’t seen any activity in a while. There haven’t been any > relevant commits since 2010 (I didn’t search the history further than > that…) - The last release dat

Re: [text] Thoughts on cutting a 1.1 release?

Go for it. Gary On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote: > Hello all, > > Now that we have WordUtils and the RandomStringGenerator in the [text] > codebase, it feels like we could cut a 1.1 release. What are folks feelings > one way or the other? > > Cheers, > -Rob > ---

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > I think we should move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant for the following > reasons: > > - Jelly hasn’t seen any activity in a while. There haven’t been any > relevant commits since 2010 (I didn’t search the history further than th

Re: [FUNCTOR] How do we move on?

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > Functor was a nice idea back in 2011, but I think we promoted it to proper > prematurely. In the light of Java 8 and it’s functional programming > support, it is questionable whether a component like functor is really > needed any

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the src zip does not build 'mvn site' because it is missing a checkstyle file: [INFO] [INFO] BUILD FAILURE [INFO] ---

[VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant

Hi, I think we should move Apache Commons Jelly to dormant for the following reasons: - Jelly hasn’t seen any activity in a while. There haven’t been any relevant commits since 2010 (I didn’t search the history further than that…) - The last release dates back to 2005. - There is no activity in

[FUNCTOR] How do we move on?

Hi, Functor was a nice idea back in 2011, but I think we promoted it to proper prematurely. In the light of Java 8 and it’s functional programming support, it is questionable whether a component like functor is really needed anymore. So the question is: how do we get on from here? I see several

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

tag builds fine locally and on travis: https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-lang/builds/233274009?utm_source=github_status&utm_medium=notification reports and site look fine + 1 (non-binding) Thanks, Pascal Am 17.05.2017 um 18:02 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: Hello, we have fixed quite a few bug

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

Not sure when the next planned release is, but it might be worth adding the proposed entry in MANIFEST.MF for modules. It isn't guaranteed to be in the final JDK 9, but my best guess is that it won't change now. It would involve making a pom.xml change to add this to the manifest: Automatic-Module

Re: [LANG] Travis build is broken

Hi everybody, a fast and easy way to run all checks (rat, clirr, javadoc, findbugs, checkstyle) locally is running maven without any goals. Just just run "./mvn" before committing. -Pascal p.s.: @Benedikt: Thank you very much for cutting R2. Am 17.05.2017 um 16:00 schrieb Benedikt Ritter:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

Not a blocker but LANG-1312 is mentioned twice in the release notes txt file. Gary On May 17, 2017 9:03 AM, "Benedikt Ritter" wrote: Hello, we have fixed quite a few bugs and added some nice new features since Commons Lang 3.5 was released, so I would like to release Commons Lang 3.6 based on

Re: [LANG] Travis build is broken

I do not think we have the threading annotations resolved, unless we leave them out for 3.6 which is OK by me. Gary On May 17, 2017 7:00 AM, "Benedikt Ritter" wrote: > Hi everybody, > > This commit [1] broke the Travis build since the Travis build now also > runs windbags and check style (which

[VOTE] Release Apache Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2

Hello, we have fixed quite a few bugs and added some nice new features since Commons Lang 3.5 was released, so I would like to release Commons Lang 3.6 based on RC2. The reason we had to cut a second release is, that there were some discussions around the annotations for documenting concurrency

Re: [text] Thoughts on cutting a 1.1 release?

+ 1 to a 1.1 Release Am 17. Mai 2017 16:45:48 MESZ schrieb Rob Tompkins : >Hello all, > >Now that we have WordUtils and the RandomStringGenerator in the [text] >codebase, it feels like we could cut a 1.1 release. What are folks >feelings one way or the other? > >Cheers, >-Rob >

[text] Thoughts on cutting a 1.1 release?

Hello all, Now that we have WordUtils and the RandomStringGenerator in the [text] codebase, it feels like we could cut a 1.1 release. What are folks feelings one way or the other? Cheers, -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsu

[LANG] Travis build is broken

Hi everybody, This commit [1] broke the Travis build since the Travis build now also runs windbags and check style (which is a good think, since it means less work for the RM). Please run those reports before committing stuff. I’m going to correct that and then cut RC2 for the 3.6 release. Che