Re: Pointers

2011-01-03 Thread Rafał Krupiński
W dniu 03.01.2011 20:15, Stephen J. Butler pisze: 2011/1/3 Rafał Krupiński: W dniu 03.01.2011 18:45, Michael Giannakopoulos pisze: Hello to all Apache Commons Developers! I wish a happy new year and i hope that all your expectations will come true! I would like to propose a new feature in

Re: Pointers

2011-01-03 Thread Rafał Krupiński
W dniu 03.01.2011 18:45, Michael Giannakopoulos pisze: Hello to all Apache Commons Developers! I wish a happy new year and i hope that all your expectations will come true! I would like to propose a new feature in apache commons... Wouldn't it be great if commons api provided a pointer operator (

Re: [NET] Move to o.a.c Maven groupId

2010-08-16 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > The idea is vice versa: Do not change the groupId, unless you are > considering changes as serious as changing the package name. I don't see why. Domain based groupIds are standard now, they are easier to find in IDE tools and I hear maven

Re: [IO] Progress Monitor

2010-04-08 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: [..] > When I am copying a directory containing possibly hundreds of files, I do > want to know how far along I am. Recall that File >objects describe both files and directories. Good point. > The progress monitor itself can decide if the ope

Re: [IO] Progress Monitor

2010-04-06 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On 06.04.2010 19:03, Gary Gregory wrote: -Original Message- From: Rafał Krupiński [mailto:r.krupin...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 03:59 To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [IO] Progress Monitor [...] interface ProgressMonitor{ void begin(int whole); void progress

Re: [IO] Progress Monitor

2010-04-06 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > We use [io] for our server, which is great, but when looked at using it from > our Eclipse based tools, I found the lack of support for monitoring a blocker. > > What about providing and support and pluggable progress monitor, pre

Re: Future of Transaction subproject

2010-03-28 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On 28.03.2010 20:13, Henri Yandell wrote: Unless anyone speaks up for it, I'm all for our making a Retired section and moving Transaction to it. Possibly we could relabel 'Dormant' then to be more Sandbox focused and consider some others for Retired (Attributes, Discovery, Modeler jump to mind).