Hi.
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 16:08, sebb a écrit :
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 12:33, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 11:16, sebb a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 1
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 18:10, Pascal Schumacher
wrote:
>
> Am 11.02.2019 um 12:19 schrieb Alex Herbert:
> > I would like to upgrade the checkstyle version in commons-rng.
> > Currently the project uses maven-checkstyle-plugin 3.0.0 which
> > defaults to checkstyle 6.18.
> >
> > This version is old
vanzin commented on issue #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with backward
compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#issuecomment-462470788
Not using any tool, just reviewing the code here.
--
aremily commented on issue #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with backward
compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#issuecomment-462469860
Completely spaced off that that was a compile time check. I'll swap it out
with a dynamic one. What
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255644566
##
File path: src/main/native/org/apache/commons/crypto/OpenSslInfoNative.c
##
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255640785
##
File path: Makefile
##
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
include Makefile.common
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255646682
##
File path: src/main/native/org/apache/commons/crypto/cipher/OpenSslNative.c
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255646781
##
File path: src/main/native/org/apache/commons/crypto/cipher/OpenSslNative.c
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255647218
##
File path:
src/main/native/org/apache/commons/crypto/random/OpenSslCryptoRa
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255642430
##
File path:
src/main/java/org/apache/commons/crypto/jna/OpenSslJnaCryptoRand
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255640544
##
File path: .gitignore
##
@@ -1,37 +0,0 @@
-*~
Review comment:
vanzin commented on a change in pull request #92: OpenSSL 1.1.0 updates with
backward compatibility for OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.0.1
URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/pull/92#discussion_r255640619
##
File path: .travis.yml
##
@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ matrix:
- "cu
Am 11.02.2019 um 12:19 schrieb Alex Herbert:
I would like to upgrade the checkstyle version in commons-rng.
Currently the project uses maven-checkstyle-plugin 3.0.0 which
defaults to checkstyle 6.18.
This version is old [1] and not supported by modern IDEs. An update
(to version 8.x) would al
I checked which mailing lists exist for commons, and it looks like
different repos are configured differently.
e.g. commons-lang has github updates going to issues@, commons-numbers
to notifications@, and a bunch, as we can see, to dev@.
As long as it's consistent, I'm ok with anything, although
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 12:33, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 11:16, sebb a écrit :
> >
> > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they
Depending on how old the version of Checktyle you are currently using is,
you may have to update the contents of your checkstyle xml file to work
with the current version.
Gary
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 7:48 AM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 12:19, Alex Herbert a
> écrit :
> >
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 12:19, Alex Herbert a écrit :
>
> I would like to upgrade the checkstyle version in commons-rng. Currently
> the project uses maven-checkstyle-plugin 3.0.0 which defaults to
> checkstyle 6.18.
>
> This version is old [1] and not supported by modern IDEs. An update (to
> ver
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 11:16, sebb a écrit :
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit :
> > >
> > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either
> > > to the current list or to dev@ for list
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 3:47 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> -1
>
> Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message
> threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk
> of harm to the community that that represents.
>
> I vote to leave the current list co
I would like to upgrade the checkstyle version in commons-rng. Currently
the project uses maven-checkstyle-plugin 3.0.0 which defaults to
checkstyle 6.18.
This version is old [1] and not supported by modern IDEs. An update (to
version 8.x) would allow checkstyle to be run within the IDE and av
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit :
> >
> > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either
> > to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and
> > notifications@
>
> I had a look at tha
Hi.
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit :
>
> I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either
> to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and
> notifications@
I had a look at that too.
But IMO
* "dev" and
* "commits", "notifications", ...
are diffe
Hello.
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 09:47, Mark Thomas a écrit :
>
> -1
>
> Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message
> threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk
> of harm to the community that that represents.
>
> I vote to leave the current li
I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either
to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and
notifications@
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:47, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> -1
>
> Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message
> threads being moved
-1
Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message
threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk
of harm to the community that that represents.
I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any
of the issues described. (I'm using
Hi all,
The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly
set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List
. I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the
reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making
this change.
This is broken for multiple reasons.
It v
(please make sure to add me to the CC when replying)
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 13:58, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 2:11 PM Eitan Adler wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 04:47, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > >
> > > I propose we update Commons CLI from Java 5 to 7.
> >
> > Why not Java
Hi all,
my PLC4X driver using a combination of Apache Commons SCXML (2.0) and Apache
Daffodil is doing even better than I imagined, when starting the whole thing.
Right now I’m improving the thing to be more on-par with the existing drivers.
However there are still a few little things bugging m
28 matches
Mail list logo
