The next release is binary compatible except for *1* method that has
been added to a (fairly infrequently used) interface. Does that still
mean I should burn 2.5 and go for 3.0. And would that be 3.0 or 3.0.0
?
Kristian
-
To unsu
Just to be clear on this, the breach is adding an interface to
org.apache.commons.io.input.TailerListener#endOfFileReached
and will probably only affect a few users. I'm documenting this in
release notes.
Personally I'd say this is 2.5 simply due to its very limited impact,
but version numbers ar
On 19 September 2015 at 12:58, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> Just to be clear on this, the breach is adding an interface to
>
> org.apache.commons.io.input.TailerListener#endOfFileReached
> and will probably only affect a few users. I'm documenting this in
> release notes.
This is binary compatible
On 19 September 2015 at 13:33, sebb wrote:
> On 19 September 2015 at 12:58, Kristian Rosenvold
> wrote:
>> Just to be clear on this, the breach is adding an interface to
>>
>> org.apache.commons.io.input.TailerListener#endOfFileReached
>> and will probably only affect a few users. I'm documentin
2015-09-19 13:58 GMT+02:00 Kristian Rosenvold :
> Just to be clear on this, the breach is adding an interface to
Oops. The breach is adding a /method/.
>
> org.apache.commons.io.input.TailerListener#endOfFileReached
> and will probably only affect a few users. I'm documenting this in
> release not
On 19 September 2015 at 17:26, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> 2015-09-19 13:58 GMT+02:00 Kristian Rosenvold :
>> Just to be clear on this, the breach is adding an interface to
> Oops. The breach is adding a /method/.
That's what I assumed - adding a method to an interface does not
affect binary comp
On 19 September 2015 at 20:32, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> The next release is binary compatible except for *1* method that has
> been added to a (fairly infrequently used) interface. Does that still
> mean I should burn 2.5 and go for 3.0. And would that be 3.0 or 3.0.0
> ?
If you are thinking a
Reviewing the math4 leastsquares code ATM, and the class level javadoc for
LeastSquaresOptimizer states:
==
An algorithm that can be applied to a non-linear least squares problem.
==
How about:
Wanted to float some ideas for the LeastSquaresOptimizer (Possibly General
Optimizer) design. For example with the LevenbergMarquardtOptimizer we would
do:
`LevenbergMarquardtOptimizer.optimize(OptimizationContext c);`
Rough optimize() outline:
public static void optimise() {
//perform the opt
