Thanks Niklas.
The backward compatibility question you mention was about the
suggestion to refactor the Commons Net "small protocol"
implementations into separate packages each:
> Basically there's no problem to deliver a
> commons-net-2.0-legacy.jar that contains something along
>
> package o
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Oberhuber, Martin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The backward compatibility question you mention was about the
> suggestion to refactor the Commons Net "small protocol"
> implementations into separate packages each:
Oh, that was not my understanding. But since there
Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Oberhuber, Martin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The backward compatibility question you mention was about the
suggestion to refactor the Commons Net "small protocol"
implementations into separate packages each:
Oh, that was not my
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-configuration-test has an issue affecting its community
integration.
Thi
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:07 AM, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Oberhuber, Martin
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The backward compatibility question you mention was about the
>>> suggestion to refactor the Commons
