Re: [RNG] Site layout for modular components (Was: Release [...] RNG [...])

2019-11-14 1:35 UTC+01:00, Alex Herbert : > > >> On 13 Nov 2019, at 23:53, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >> >> Hello. >> >> Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 18:29, Alex Herbert > > a écrit : >>> >>> >>> On 13/11/2019 13:09, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hi. Do you think

Re: [RNG] Site layout for modular components (Was: Release [...] RNG [...])

> On 13 Nov 2019, at 23:53, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hello. > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 18:29, Alex Herbert > a écrit : >> >> >> On 13/11/2019 13:09, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> Do you think that it would be feasible to have all those fixes

Re: [RNG] Site layout for modular components (Was: Release [...] RNG [...])

Hello. Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 18:29, Alex Herbert a écrit : > > > On 13/11/2019 13:09, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Do you think that it would be feasible to have all those fixes applied > > to other modular components (that were based on the [RNG] layout) > > through a common layer

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

> […] I had a bit more time to investigate why I could not inject MathJax into the header of commons-skin using the site descriptor. As of maven site plugin 3.5 any injected XHTML has to be escaped using CDATA XML notation [1]. Commons-skin is based on a version of Apache Maven Fluido

Re: [RNG] Site layout for modular components (Was: Release [...] RNG [...])

On 13/11/2019 13:09, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hi. Do you think that it would be feasible to have all those fixes applied to other modular components (that were based on the [RNG] layout) through a common layer (another POM) between those components and "commons-parent"? Most of the fixes have

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 17:03, sebb a écrit : > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 15:12, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 15:52, sebb a écrit : > > > > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:38, Gilles Sadowski > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello. > > > > > > > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 14:49, sebb

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 15:12, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 15:52, sebb a écrit : > > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:38, Gilles Sadowski > wrote: > > > > > Hello. > > > > > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 14:49, sebb a écrit : > > > > > > > > +1 for CP > > > > > > > > CP versions

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 15:52, sebb a écrit : > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:38, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 14:49, sebb a écrit : > > > > > > +1 for CP > > > > > > CP versions are entirely optional; > > > > Not "entirely". [We already had this discussion.]

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:38, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hello. > > Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 14:49, sebb a écrit : > > > > +1 for CP > > > > CP versions are entirely optional; > > Not "entirely". [We already had this discussion.] > It happened that a fix for was available in a newer CP but > that

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:02, Alex Herbert wrote: > > On 13/11/2019 13:49, sebb wrote: > > +1 for CP > > > > CP versions are entirely optional; a new version is only used if a > > component chooses to use it. > > > > Is this also true of commons-skin? > > If so, then +1 > > cp bundles this site

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

Hello. Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 14:49, sebb a écrit : > > +1 for CP > > CP versions are entirely optional; Not "entirely". [We already had this discussion.] It happened that a fix for was available in a newer CP but that in CP broke some components (e.g. when CP functionality is "enhanced"

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

On 13/11/2019 13:49, sebb wrote: +1 for CP CP versions are entirely optional; a new version is only used if a component chooses to use it. Is this also true of commons-skin? If so, then +1 cp bundles this site descriptor: src/site.xml which contains:       org.apache.commons    

Re: [ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

+1 for CP CP versions are entirely optional; a new version is only used if a component chooses to use it. Is this also true of commons-skin? If so, then +1 If not, then extra care needs to be taken to ensure backwards compatibilty. There should probably be a formal vote on the actual changes in

[ALL] Updates to commons-parent and commons-skin

The recent release of RNG has highlighted some issues with the commons parent configuration for multi-module builds and a desirable change to commons skin. 1. [parent] JaCoCo aggregate reports are included. Aggregate reports show coverage of dependencies. Since most commons components are

Re: [commons-jexl] branch master updated: JEXL-307: tidy API (made JexlOptions a concrete non derivable class), try to ensure lexical interpretation on lexical feature, allow runtime options to be con

If you are referring to the class org.apache.commons.jexl3.internal.Options Is binary compat required for an internal class? On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 10:20, Gary Gregory wrote: > I do not think your changes to JexlOptions are binary compatible so -1 :-( > > Gary > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 17:01

[RNG] Site layout for modular components (Was: Release [...] RNG [...])

Hi. Do you think that it would be feasible to have all those fixes applied to other modular components (that were based on the [RNG] layout) through a common layer (another POM) between those components and "commons-parent"? Regards, Gilles Le mer. 13 nov. 2019 à 12:53, Alex Herbert a écrit :

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons RNG 1.3 based on RC1

On 13/11/2019 11:38, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hello. Le mar. 12 nov. 2019 à 17:41, Alex Herbert a écrit : On 12 Nov 2019, at 15:39, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hello Alex. Le mar. 12 nov. 2019 à 16:15, Alex Herbert mailto:alex.d.herb...@gmail.com>> a écrit : On 12/11/2019 09:06, Gilles

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons RNG 1.3 based on RC1

Hello. Le mar. 12 nov. 2019 à 17:41, Alex Herbert a écrit : > > > > > On 12 Nov 2019, at 15:39, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > > > Hello Alex. > > > > Le mar. 12 nov. 2019 à 16:15, Alex Herbert > > a écrit : > >> > >> > >> On 12/11/2019 09:06, Gilles Sadowski

Re: [commons-jexl] branch master updated: JEXL-307: tidy API (made JexlOptions a concrete non derivable class), try to ensure lexical interpretation on lexical feature, allow runtime options to be con

I do not think your changes to JexlOptions are binary compatible so -1 :-( Gary On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 17:01 wrote: > This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository. > > henrib pushed a commit to branch master > in repository