BTW, it is possible that I'm not using LGQ correctly. If so, please show how to pass the tests I've added. I'd much rather use something that is better tested than my personal code.
-Ajo. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Ajo Fod <ajo....@gmail.com> wrote: > I just posted a patch on this issue. Feel free to edit as necessary to > match your standards. There is a clear issue with LGQ. > > Cheers, > Ajo. > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>wrote: > >> Ted, >> >> >> >>> Did you read my other (rather more lengthy) post? Is that "jumping"? >>>> >>>> >>> Yes. You jumped on him rather than helped him be productive. The >>> general >>> message is "we have something in the works, don't bother us with your >>> ideas". >>> >> >> Then please read all the messages pertaining to those issues more >> carefully: >> I never wrote such a thing (neither now nor in the past). >> I pointed to a potential problem in the usage of the CM code. >> I pointed (several times and in details) to problems in candidate >> contributions, >> with arguments that go well beyond "bad formatting". >> I pointed out how we could improve the functionality _together_ (i.e. by >> using >> what we have, instead of throwing it out without even trying to figure >> out how >> good or bad it is). >> >> IMHO, these were all valid suggestions to be productive in helping CM to >> become >> better, instead of merely larger. The former indeed requires more effort >> than >> the latter. >> >> >> >> Gilles >> >> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> >
