Re: [ALL] About binary compatibility

2016-06-03 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Benson, Benson Margulies wrote: > Just to cite a fact: > > If you write: > > > > > ... > x > ... > > You will get x. Even if transitive dependencies ask for x+10. I only > learned this recently. Yes, but you dropped the significant part here: groupId/artifac

Re: [ALL] About binary compatibility

2016-06-03 Thread sebb
On 2 June 2016 at 21:42, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > we do seem to have different opinions when it comes to binary compatibility > and how it should be handled. Usually we would say "this should be decided > on a component basis". However this discussion is coming up again and again > and I t

Re: [all] Automatic site update

2016-06-03 Thread sebb
On 2 June 2016 at 23:15, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> Emmanuel Bourg schrieb am Do., 2. Juni 2016 um >> 23:39 Uhr: >> >> > Hi all, >> > >> > A part of the release process is to update the web site. I wonder if >> > this could be simplified wit

Re: [Poll][VFS] Switch to Git

2016-06-03 Thread Gary Gregory
ping? Gary On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 3:46 PM, James Carman wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:43 PM Bernd Eckenfels > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to be able to use Git with the Apache Commons VFS repo. As > > we agreed upon I call out the intention to do this and ask you for

[BCEL] Binary compatibility - approaches to solving the interface changes

2016-06-03 Thread sebb
I found the Clirr report I did on BCEL: http://home.apache.org/~sebb/BCEL/clirr-report.html This compares BCEL trunk with 5.2. [The 5.2 code was shaded to align the package names.] As can be seen, the main changes are additions to the Visitor interface. There are several approaches to fix this:

Re: [BCEL] Binary compatibility - approaches to solving the interface changes

2016-06-03 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 3/06/2016 à 11:13, sebb a écrit : > I found the Clirr report I did on BCEL: > > http://home.apache.org/~sebb/BCEL/clirr-report.html > > This compares BCEL trunk with 5.2. > [The 5.2 code was shaded to align the package names.] > > As can be seen, the main changes are additions to the Visitor

Re: [bcel] Deprecated InstructionConstants

2016-06-03 Thread Matt Sicker
Isn't it the clirr plugin that's failing with bcel? On 2 June 2016 at 17:07, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Gary Gregory schrieb am Fr., 3. Juni 2016 um > 00:06 Uhr: > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Jörg Schaible > > wrote: > > > > > Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:34

Re: [ALL] About binary compatibility

2016-06-03 Thread Gilles
On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 21:35:45 +, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Emmanuel Bourg schrieb am Do., 2. Juni 2016 um 23:26 Uhr: Le 2/06/2016 à 22:42, Benedikt Ritter a écrit : > - since our components are depended upon by a lot of projects, we need to > take special care regarding compatibility. +1,

Re: [ALL] About binary compatibility

2016-06-03 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > I don't understand what's wrong with semantic versioning and keeping > the same maven coordinates. No sane person should be using RELEASE or > LATEST. The real problem is, IMO, not the versioning scheme, but the fact, that most applicatio

Re: [bcel] Deprecated InstructionConstants

2016-06-03 Thread Gary Gregory
Yeah, that rings a bell. Gary On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > Isn't it the clirr plugin that's failing with bcel? > > On 2 June 2016 at 17:07, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > > Gary Gregory schrieb am Fr., 3. Juni 2016 um > > 00:06 Uhr: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:15 PM

[Result][VFS] Switch to Git

2016-06-03 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
Hello, There was no objection to switching VFS project to Git as the primary source control. Here are the people participated (I also vote +1): Bernd Eckenfels Gary Gregory Dave Brosius Woonsan Ko Josh Elser Ralph Goers Jochen Wiedmann Christopher How to proceed? Open an Infra ticket? Gruss Be

Re: [Result][VFS] Switch to Git

2016-06-03 Thread Gary Gregory
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Hello, > > There was no objection to switching VFS project to Git as the primary > source control. Here are the people participated (I also vote +1): > > Bernd Eckenfels > Gary Gregory > Dave Brosius > Woonsan Ko > Josh Elser > Ralph Goers

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons BeanUtils 1.9.3 RC1

2016-06-03 Thread Oliver Heger
Build works fine with Java 1.6 on Windows 10. Artifacts and site look good. The site cannot be built with Java 8, and the release notes are missing BEANUTILS-477, but this is not blocking. I ran the tests for [configuration] with the new jar and got a single test failure which seems to be caused

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons BeanUtils 1.9.3 RC1

2016-06-03 Thread Gary Gregory
On Jun 3, 2016 12:53 PM, "Oliver Heger" wrote: > > Build works fine with Java 1.6 on Windows 10. Artifacts and site look good. > > The site cannot be built with Java 8, and the release notes are missing > BEANUTILS-477, but this is not blocking. > > I ran the tests for [configuration] with the new

Re: [VOTE] Apache Commons BeanUtils 1.9.3 RC1

2016-06-03 Thread Oliver Heger
Am 03.06.2016 um 22:16 schrieb Gary Gregory: > On Jun 3, 2016 12:53 PM, "Oliver Heger" > wrote: >> >> Build works fine with Java 1.6 on Windows 10. Artifacts and site look > good. >> >> The site cannot be built with Java 8, and the release notes are missing >> BEANUTILS-477, but this is not bloc

Re: [Result][VFS] Switch to Git

2016-06-03 Thread Woonsan Ko
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Bernd Eckenfels > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> There was no objection to switching VFS project to Git as the primary >> source control. Here are the people participated (I also vote +1): >> >> Bernd Eckenfels >> Ga