Re: [lang] What's left for 3.0?

2011-01-27 Thread Henri Yandell
3 issues now, by punting the three non-blockers up to 3.1. Mostly it means that we need to decide what to do on LANG-624 and then get releasing. Hen On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > And now down to 6 issues. > > 1 of them is a non-issue for release (JDK 1.7 has bugs); 1

Re: [lang] What's left for 3.0?

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Hen, Henri Yandell wrote: > 3 issues now, by punting the three non-blockers up to 3.1. > > Mostly it means that we need to decide what to do on LANG-624 and then > get releasing. In the light of LANG-577, I wondered if the mutable package is still necessary looking at the concurrent stuff o

Re: [lang] What's left for 3.0?

2011-01-27 Thread Stephen Colebourne
On 27 January 2011 08:45, Jörg Schaible wrote: > In the light of LANG-577, I wondered if the mutable package is still > necessary looking at the concurrent stuff of the JDK. I tried once to start > a discussion about it > (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/112282), but got

[lang] Android users wanted :)

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Guys, in the shed of LANG-624, can somebody tell us, what the different Android versions return for the java.version and java.specification.version? - Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For addit

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread luc . maisonobe
- "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Luc Maisonobe > wrote: > > There are only two issues left in Jira for 2.2. > > > > I think MATH-488 could be considered resolved as the class has been > > deprecated as requested 5 days ago. > > > > Concerning MATH-487, I understo

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-scxml-test (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-27 Thread Gump
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 gene...@gump.apache.org. Project commons-scxml-test has an issue affecting its community integration. This

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-jelly-tags-quartz (in module commons-jelly) failed

2011-01-27 Thread Gump
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 gene...@gump.apache.org. Project commons-jelly-tags-quartz has an issue affecting its community integratio

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-proxy-test (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-27 Thread Gump
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 gene...@gump.apache.org. Project commons-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration. This

Re: [Math] Function (package "analysis.function")

2011-01-27 Thread Gilles Sadowski
> What functions are you talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalised_logistic_function http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_function http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_function ... Gilles - To unsubscribe, e-mail: d

Re: [Math] Refactoring of package "analysis.integration" (MATH-501)

2011-01-27 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hi. > > I need some clarifications before embarking into the clean-up of that > > package. > > > > The "integrate" method of interface "UnivariateRealIntegrator" is defined > > as: > >  double integrate(UnivariateRealFunction f, double min, double max) > >        throws ConvergenceException, MathU

Re: release commons validator 1.4

2011-01-27 Thread David Karlsen
Any update to the status? 2011/1/19 Niall Pemberton > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Jacob Zwiers > wrote: > > I'll echo that. > > > > I had put a query to the user's list a last week asking a similar > question. > > > > I understand that the committers are working on JSR-303 and validator2 >

Re: [Math] Refactoring of package "analysis.integration" (MATH-501)

2011-01-27 Thread Phil Steitz
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:50 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hi. > >> > I need some clarifications before embarking into the clean-up of that >> > package. >> > >> > The "integrate" method of interface "UnivariateRealIntegrator" is defined >> > as: >> >  double integrate(UnivariateRealFunction f, dou

Re: [Math] Function (package "analysis.function")

2011-01-27 Thread Phil Steitz
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >> What functions are you talking about? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalised_logistic_function > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_function > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_function > ... > OK. The third one may be pretty muc

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread Phil Steitz
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:04 AM, wrote: > > - "Phil Steitz" a écrit : > >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Luc Maisonobe >> wrote: >> > There are only two issues left in Jira for 2.2. >> > >> > I think MATH-488 could be considered resolved as the class has been >> > deprecated as requested

RE: [lang] What's left for 3.0?

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:flame...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 03:04 > To: Commons Developers List; gudnabr...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: [lang] What's left for 3.0? > > 3 issues now, by punting the three non-blockers up to 3.1. > > Mostly it means

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Phil, > OK. But now that we have detected an "aroma" around unilaterally > making UnivariateRealFunction throw Math*User*Exception, I wonder if > there is a way to introduce an unchecked parent that gets us out of > this. We may want to reserve the right to do this in 3.0, so the "head > start" i

Re: [Math] Function (package "analysis.function")

2011-01-27 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:13:32AM -0500, Phil Steitz wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski > wrote: > >> What functions are you talking about? > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalised_logistic_function > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_function > > http://en.wikipe

RE: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Julius Davies [mailto:juliusdav...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 18:18 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! > > >> However, it will probably do no harm to ask at legal@. > > > > Do we actually have to distri

Re: [Math] Function (package "analysis.function")

2011-01-27 Thread Phil Steitz
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:13:32AM -0500, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski >> wrote: >> >> What functions are you talking about? >> > >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalised_logistic_function >>

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread Phil Steitz
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Phil, > >> OK.  But now that we have detected an "aroma" around unilaterally >> making UnivariateRealFunction throw Math*User*Exception, I wonder if >> there is a way to introduce an unchecked parent that gets us out of >> this. We may want

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Julius, Julius Davies wrote: >>> However, it will probably do no harm to ask at legal@. >> >> Do we actually have to distribute it? Maybe we can add is as zip to the >> Maven repo and use the dependency plugin to download and extract it on >> the fly. >> >> - Jörg > > > Another option: as

RE: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 > To: dev@commons.apache.org > Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! > > Hi Julius, > > Julius Davies wrote: > > >>> However, it will probably do no harm to ask at

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 27/01/2011 17:49, Phil Steitz a écrit : > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski > wrote: >> Phil, >> >>> OK. But now that we have detected an "aroma" around unilaterally >>> making UnivariateRealFunction throw Math*User*Exception, I wonder if >>> there is a way to introduce an unche

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread sebb
On 27 January 2011 17:24, Gary Gregory wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 >> To: dev@commons.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! >> >> Hi Julius, >> >> Julius Davies wrote: >

[CODEC] Base-n refactoring

2011-01-27 Thread sebb
I think I've now got the Base32 classes to a reasonable state. (More tests are surely needed). I decided to drop all the static encode/decode methods, as this simplifies the class considerably. Perhaps one are two are needed, but it might be best to release without them and add later if there is a

RE: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 14:51 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! > > On 27 January 2011 17:24, Gary Gregory > wrote: > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Jörg Schaible [mail

RE: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 15:13 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring > > I think I've now got the Base32 classes to a reasonable state. (More > tests are surely needed). > > I decided to dr

RE: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 15:13 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring > > I think I've now got the Base32 classes to a reasonable state. (More > tests are surely needed). > > I decided to dr

Re: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring

2011-01-27 Thread sebb
On 27 January 2011 21:03, Gary Gregory wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 15:13 >> To: Commons Developers List >> Subject: [CODEC] Base-n refactoring >> >> I think I've now got the Base32 classes to a reasonable state. (

RE: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Gary Gregory wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 >> To: dev@commons.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! >> >> Hi Julius, >> >> Julius Davies wrote: >> >> >>> However, it wi

Re: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?

2011-01-27 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 27/01/2011 17:49, Phil Steitz a écrit : > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski > > wrote: > >> Phil, > >> > >>> OK. But now that we have detected an "aroma" around unilaterally > >>> making UnivariateRealFunction th

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Gary Gregory
On Jan 27, 2011, at 17:43, "Jörg Schaible" wrote: > Gary Gregory wrote: > >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 >>> To: dev@commons.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [codec] Large test data set! >>> >>> H

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Gary Gregory wrote: > On Jan 27, 2011, at 17:43, "Jörg Schaible" wrote: > >> Gary Gregory wrote: >> -Original Message- From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 To: dev@commons.apache.org Subject: Re: [codec]

RE: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Gary, Gary Gregory wrote: >> >> > Another option: ask the copyright holder to relicense to us under >> >> > the ASL 2.0. That often works! > > The author has agreed to ASL 2 the files. IANAL, but how does ASL 2 cope with *data*? The author has IMHO chosen well his license. - Jörg ---

Re: [codec] Large test data set!

2011-01-27 Thread Jörg Schaible
Jörg Schaible wrote: > Gary Gregory wrote: > >> On Jan 27, 2011, at 17:43, "Jörg Schaible" wrote: >> >>> Gary Gregory wrote: >>> > -Original Message- > From: Jörg Schaible [mailto:joerg.schai...@scalaris.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:21 > To: dev@commons.ap

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-collections4 (in module apache-commons) failed

2011-01-27 Thread Gump
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 gene...@gump.apache.org. Project commons-collections4 has an issue affecting its community integration. Thi