FTR, the build that failed ran on Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS and Eclipse Adoptium
(temurin) 17.0.7+7.
Gary
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023, 17:42 Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> I guess it's good news that CI hit the error below when reviewing the PR
> that I had prepared for the POOL-391 fixes. I only saw it once in m
I think I may have figured this out. I reopened and added a comment to
POOL-411.
Phil
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:41 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> I guess it's good news that CI hit the error below when reviewing the PR
> that I had prepared for the POOL-391 fixes. I only saw it once in many
> te
I guess it's good news that CI hit the error below when reviewing the PR
that I had prepared for the POOL-391 fixes. I only saw it once in many
test runs and only on OpenJDK 20.0.1. Looks like CI is running 17 on
azure-linux. I am pretty sure it has nothing to do with the changes in the
PR, pa
Hi Phil,
Starting a new mailing thread is a good idea at this point. I'll just
mention: I really do not want to roll back code changes in master. If you
want to pick a commit in the past and create a branch 2.x from that, it's
fine with me, or tell me, and I'll be happy to create the branch. Then
On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 6:41 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 5:08 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:39 AM Gary Gregory
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Great presentation in the video Elliotte. Thanks for sharing the link.
> > >
> >
> > +1 many thanks.
> >
> > Now bac
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 5:08 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:39 AM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>
> > Great presentation in the video Elliotte. Thanks for sharing the link.
> >
>
> +1 many thanks.
>
> Now back to our hero. Let me pretend to be one of the people in the
> audience of
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:39 AM Gary Gregory
wrote:
> Great presentation in the video Elliotte. Thanks for sharing the link.
>
+1 many thanks.
Now back to our hero. Let me pretend to be one of the people in the
audience of the video.
We have this library that is used by all kinds of "program
Great presentation in the video Elliotte. Thanks for sharing the link.
Gary
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023, 10:33 Elliotte Rusty Harold
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:10 AM Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
> >
> > Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 15:22, Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:43 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> I think I can understand your rationale: Something that can be
> corrected at runtime should be signalled by a checked exception.
> Right?
No, not at all. Recoverability is **not** the distinction between
checked and unchecked exceptions.
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 17:42, Elliotte Rusty Harold
a écrit :
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:48 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> > The situation is recoverable from the caller's POV, by performing a
> > *new* call, with a correct argument. We certainly don't need a special
> > kind of exception[1]
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 16:33, Elliotte Rusty Harold
a écrit :
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:10 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 15:22, Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Gilles Sadowski
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello.
>
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:48 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> The situation is recoverable from the caller's POV, by performing a
> *new* call, with a correct argument. We certainly don't need a special
> kind of exception[1] to handle this situation. What's wrong with catching
> a "RuntimeExceptio
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 16:18, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> > I never could find a convincing example of "recoverable conditions".
>
> Really? How about typing in a bad server name, user name, or password?
Unfortunately we use different definitions of "recoverable".
IMO, they are typically *non*-re
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:10 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 15:22, Elliotte Rusty Harold
> a écrit :
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Gilles Sadowski
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 14:44, Gary Gregory a
> > > écrit :
> >
> > > I
> I never could find a convincing example of "recoverable conditions".
Really? How about typing in a bad server name, user name, or password?
That's a classic recoverable exception (in JDBC land for example).
Gary
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023, 10:11 Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 15:
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 15:22, Elliotte Rusty Harold
a écrit :
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 14:44, Gary Gregory a écrit
> > :
>
> > I agree with the second part assuming the *current* Java
> > best practices, not because
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 9:07 AM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 14:44, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> I agree with the second part assuming the *current* Java
> best practices, not because of old APIs that are here to stay
> only because of infinite backwards compatibility
Hello.
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 14:44, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> [...]
>
> Java makes a clear distinction between checked and unchecked
> exceptions. As a mid-level API, I do not feel Pool should take a
> design POV that is different from Java's intended pattern regarding
> exceptions.
I agree with
Thanks for digging in Mark (more below which will just echo my reply to Phil).
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 5:43 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 28/06/2023 14:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Hi All and Phil.
>
> I haven't been that involved in Pool recently but Pool remains a key
> dependency for Tomcat (via
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 5:26 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 6:17 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> > Hi All and Phil.
> >
> > Thank you for the thoughtful reply, Phil.
> >
> > The main driver here was two combine keeping binary compatibility
> > _and_ benefit call sites of the API by
Hello.
[Sorry to continue a discussion that should probably go in
its own thread.]
Le jeu. 29 juin 2023 à 11:43, Mark Thomas a écrit :
>
> On 28/06/2023 14:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Hi All and Phil.
>
> I haven't been that involved in Pool recently but Pool remains a key
> dependency for Tomca
On 28/06/2023 14:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
Hi All and Phil.
I haven't been that involved in Pool recently but Pool remains a key
dependency for Tomcat (via DBCP).
The main driver here was two combine keeping binary compatibility
_and_ benefit call sites of the API by _not_ having to catch Exc
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 6:17 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All and Phil.
>
> Thank you for the thoughtful reply, Phil.
>
> The main driver here was two combine keeping binary compatibility
> _and_ benefit call sites of the API by _not_ having to catch Exception
> or throw Exception, which clearly i
Hi All and Phil.
Thank you for the thoughtful reply, Phil.
The main driver here was two combine keeping binary compatibility
_and_ benefit call sites of the API by _not_ having to catch Exception
or throw Exception, which clearly is an anti-pattern. Instead, call
sites should deal with domain exc
Looking more carefully at the extent of impact, I am -1 (non-binding) on
this change. I understand what you are trying to do, but a) I don't see
that the solution actually does it (see comments by Michael in PR) and b)
it is going to create a lot of pain for users who have to modify factories,
etc
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 3:43 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> YW and thank you for the review.
>
> Yes, you are right that this is about POOL-269. While binary compatibility
> is preserved 100%, source compatibility is not. This is one of those rare
> cases where you can't make an omelette w
Hi Phil,
YW and thank you for the review.
Yes, you are right that this is about POOL-269. While binary compatibility
is preserved 100%, source compatibility is not. This is one of those rare
cases where you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs ;-) Since
binary compatibility is preser
Hi Gary, First, thanks for doing this. There are a lot of good fixes in here.
I checked the build, sigs et al on a couple of platforms and did not
find anything major except one item. I will start with the
show-stopper (IMO) and then the other smaller things.
1. I get compilation failure when
[x] +1 Release these artifacts
Building OK from tag on
Apache Maven 3.8.5 (3599d3414f046de2324203b78ddcf9b5e4388aa0)
Maven home: /opt/apache-maven-3.8.5
Java version: 17.0.7, vendor: Private Build, runtime:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-amd64
Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8
OS n
We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some enhancements since
Apache Commons Pool 2.11.1 was released, so I would like to release
Apache Commons Pool 2.12.0.
Apache Commons Pool 2.12.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/2.12.0-RC1
(svn revi
30 matches
Mail list logo
