Re: [BCEL] 6.0 release

On 03/19/2012 10:18 AM, Honton, Charles wrote: Any idea when BCEL 6.0 (with support for annotations) will be released? Is there a maven repository available for the snapshot version? Thanks, Chas - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [IO] converting streams to buffered versions - rename asBufferedxxxx to buffer?`

or ByteArrayInput/OutputStream On 05/16/2013 01:13 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: sebb wrote: The issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-330 added 4 methods: public static Buffered asBuffered(final ) where = InputStream, OutputStream, Reader, Writer I just noticed

Re: Lang: ObjectUtils

This implies that having arrays with some null elements is a) somewhat common 2) a good idea I'd say both are not true. I'm not sure the library should promote that the above is the case. On 07/04/2013 02:43 PM, Rafael Santini wrote: Hi, I would like to propose a method in ObjectUtils

Re: ObjectUtils

) { return input != null; } }); Surely the same is already possible with commons. On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Dave Brosius dbros...@mebigfatguy.com** wrote: This implies that having arrays with some null elements is a) somewhat common 2) a good idea I'd say

Re: [lang?] Converting an array to an Iterable

What would this do that java.util.Arrays.asList does not? - Original Message -From: quot;Oliver Hegerquot; ;oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de

Re: [bcel] Backwards Incompatible Change to Visitor

Sebb is right... my mistake... apologies, and thanks for the fix. dave On 08/20/2011 09:15 PM, sebb wrote: On 17 August 2011 07:06, Stefan Bodewigbode...@apache.org wrote: Hi, with svn revision 1158060 the bcel.generic.Visitor interface has become package private, breaking the Gump builds

Re: [csv] API design

+1altho, i'd think that @CSVField(trim = true) would often want to be applied at the class level, so many the name isn't so good @CSVOptions ? - Original Message -From: quot;Emmanuel Bourgquot; ;ebo...@apache.org

Re: [BCEL] Move to JIRA?

fine by me On 11/25/2011 08:32 PM, sebb wrote: BCEL currently uses Bugzilla, but AFAIK all other Commons components use JIRA Should BCEL be moved to JIRA? Just a thought. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [codec]Bug or Feature

looks wrong to me as well. On 02/11/2012 12:01 PM, Andreas Menke wrote: Hi, from BaseNCodec.java: how does resizeBuffer() know how big 'int size' is? Bug or Feature? /** * Ensure that the buffer has room for codesize/code bytes * * @param size minimum spare space

Re: [VOTE][Lang] Update to Java 6

+1 - Original Message -From: quot;Gary Gregoryquot; ;ggreg...@apache.org;http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Digester 3.0 based on RC1 - take2

Perhaps i am confused but it appears the source code links on the web site (http://commons.apache.org/digester/source-repository.html) are wrong,http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/sandbox/digester3/trunk svn checkout http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/digester3/trunk

Re: [BCEL] Next release

I'm all for it. But there needs to be a decision which seems clear cut to me. There is code in the code base (by accident--i suppose) now that requires 1.5. Previously we didn't have that requirement, so pushing out a release means raising the minimum to 1.5. My vote is lets do it two both. But

Re: [BCEL] Next release

If we can agree that BCEL will have a minimum requirement of 1.5 for the next version, then we should probably actually use 1.5 throughout on purpose, rather than by accident. I'd be happy to participate in making these changes. Can we vote on that part of it at least, so that work could

Re: [BCEL] Next release

On 07/19/2011 05:03 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: +1 for using 1.5 So then let's call it 6.0? ...and work through bugzilla towards a release? I agree with naming it 6.0. Another more important reason is that this version of bcel is backwards incompatible with previous releases, in this regard:

BCEL: Code Review Please

Found an collection type error when adding generics in this code below. Collection was holding both ElementValueGen and ElementValue objects which are unrelated by inheritance. Modified code so only ElementValueGen are in the collection, using - evalues.add(datums[i]);

Re: [BCEL] Move code to Commons SVN ?

What's the svn url now? On 07/22/2011 06:45 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: awesome ... thx! On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Henri Yandellflame...@gmail.com wrote: Done. http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/bcel/ On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Torsten Curdttcu...@vafer.org wrote:

Re: [BCEL] Move code to Commons SVN ?

hey.. wooops, no. :) On 07/23/2011 04:56 AM, sebb wrote: On 23 July 2011 04:45, Dave Brosiusdbros...@baybroadband.net wrote: Thanks, also, is the commit hook that sends email notifications for BCEL set up? Yes, it is the standard commons one. Had some commits tonite, but didn't see

Re: [BCEL] Code format non-standard

no objections(you'll find a bunch of tabs in there as well) - Original Message -From: quot;sebbquot; ;seb...@gmail.com

Re: [math] serialVersionUID

On 08/07/2011 12:17 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: I use eclipse for this. I like Jörg suggestion too but have one question: is there a problem if two different classes have the same id ? They will differ by fully qualified class name, of course, but is it sufficient ? nothing wrong with two

MannWhitneyUTest.mannWhitneyU

I would think that in public double mannWhitneyU(final double[] x, final double[] y) final double U1 = sumRankX - (x.length * (x.length + 1)) / 2; should be final double U1 = sumRankX - (x.length * (x.length + 1)) / 2*.0*; right?

Re: [DISCUSS] promotion and release of [weaver] component

On 09/17/2013 04:40 PM, Matt Benson wrote: I propose that the [weaver] component [1] is ready for release. I am the primary contributor to the code, but Mark Struberg also worked on the core architecture. As soon as [weaver] is released I intend to incorporate the privilizer module into Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] Mission Statement for Commons...

Phil, You definitely have a point, but nothing helps build a development community than seeing releases go out. I want to be part of that If there's no idea if or even when another version of a library will go out, especially one that's hasn't released in a while, it deflates possible

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

in the spirit of better late than never +1 - yes, move to Git - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

I vote -1 to this process. I see no value in attic-izing projects. On 10/14/2013 11:55 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: I contend that all of the Commons components are inactive and should move to the Attic/Dormant. In line with Phil's recent suggestion that anyone can present a dormancy challenge at

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Dave Brosius dbros...@apache.org wrote: I vote -1 to this process. I see no value in attic-izing projects. On 10/14/2013 11:55 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: I contend that all of the Commons components are inactive and should move to the Attic/Dormant. In line with Phil's recent

Re: [CHALLENGE] Move All of Commons to the Dormant

schrieb Dave Brosius dbros...@apache.org: Perhaps for new users, however there are lots of projects currently using these libraries. We are extending the middle finger to them by doing this. I would come away thinking i'm not going to risk using any Apache library, if I they will just yank away

Re: [VOTE] Move Apache Commons to Git for SCM...

Those who wanted to move to Git have given up several days ago, leaving this thread to be 'argued' by those who successfully squashed the action. James has already canceled the test project request in INFRA, and so it seems pointless for this thread to continue. You won, go off and have a beer,

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Commons Email version 1.3.2 released

Robert, send an email to dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org *http://tinyurl.com/njw7snw * On 10/26/2013 01:08 AM, Robert Hood wrote: please remove me from the list On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Thomas Neidhart t...@apache.org wrote: Hello. The Apache Commons team is pleased to

Re: [bcel] Next release

I think it should be 6.0 since we've changed from requiring jdk1.4 to jdk1.5 and that really shouldn't be done on a point release. --- br type=_moz / On 2014-04-25 08:57, Gary Gregory wrote: Either version # is fine with me. Gary On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Torsten Curdt

Re: [BCEL] Trying a release?

+1 On 08/22/2014 02:54 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: I've uploaded the current site of BCEL to my apache space: http://people.apache.org/~britter/bcel-6.0-SNAPSHOT/ We have 12 clirr errors, because some methods have been added to the org.apache.bcel.classfile.Visitor interface. Since we already

Re: [BCEL] Trying a release?

I think the driving thing is that it is bumped up to jdk1.5 from 1.4 On 08/25/2014 05:08 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 22/08/2014 12:12, Stefan Bodewig a écrit : If BCEL6 can be used as a drop in replacement, then not changing the coordinates might be a good idea (but begs the question of why

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC1

+1 On 09/18/2014 08:44 PM, sebb wrote: On 19 September 2014 00:14, Emmanuel Bourg ebo...@apache.org wrote: Hi all, The first release candidate of BCEL is ready to pass under your scrutiny. Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/bcel/tags/BCEL_6_0_RC1/ (r1621539) Release notes:

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC3

+1 On 10/08/2014 01:54 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: +1 builds from source-tarball with my complete compiler zoo Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Hi all, The third release candidate of BCEL is ready to pass under your scrutiny. Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/bcel/tags/BCEL_6_0_RC3/

Re: [bcel] PLSE changes to BCEL

6.0 already has breaking changes, thus the move to version 6.0. One specific case is that annotations are now coming in as annotations as opposed to unknown code attributes. Code that relies on parsing annotations thru unknown code attributes will break. On 02/23/2015 07:30 AM, Ben McCann

Re: [pool] apparently bad jar released ... ugh. help!

Yeah, can't pull it back. Just need to push a new version. On 05/27/2015 05:57 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: Somehow the 2.4 binary release jar that I just pushed to the mirrors and maven central appears to be corrupted. I don't know why / how this happened but I get the following error when I build

Re: [VOTE] Move COMPRESS to git

+1 On 08/22/2015 03:29 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: Hi all more thann half a year ago I promised to call for a vote for migrating to git as soon as 1.10 has been released. Well that took longer than expected :-) Anyway, here is the vote: +1 Move to git -1 Stick with svn vote will be open for

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC4

yes. definitely. On 08/11/2015 01:34 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: Is the org.apache.bcel.classfile.Visitor https://people.apache.org/~chas/bcel-6.0-RC3/xref/org/apache/bcel/classfile/Visitor.html interface something a user would implement? Gary On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:52 PM, c...@honton.org

Re: [VOTE] Release BCEL 6.0 based on RC4

I'm not sure having the 6 in bcel6 is such a good idea. the prefix already disambiguates the package name, so this isn't needed and is kind of limiting. On 08/10/2015 06:49 AM, sebb wrote: Assuming that the package name change is required, then there are also a lot of mutable non-private

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

Dear My. Shapiro, Greetings! Thanks for wanting to share this codebase, and making it available at github. I have attempted to cleanup the repository to make it more approachable for others who want to take a look, including reorganizing the src tree and adding a proper maven build system.

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

so it's not visible by default on the github page. -Pascal Am 24.10.2015 um 22:27 schrieb Dave Brosius: Dear My. Shapiro, Greetings! Thanks for wanting to share this codebase, and making it available at github. I have attempted to cleanup the repository to make it more approachable for oth

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

git clone g...@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git git checkout gh-pages if you like, I already have a fork on github of it, I can merge gh-pages into master, and delete the gh-pages branch, and then the repo will be obviously just a one branch project. On 10/28/2015 08:19 PM, Phil

Re: [VOTE] Accept Naomi

+1 On 10/29/2015 08:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will execute a software grant with the authors and

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi

I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the gh-pages branch here https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if you like. On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: Phil: I am not happy about proceeding,

Re: [VOTE] Accept Naomi

Emmanuel, I understand where your opinions come from, and respect your arguments. I generally agree with your sentiments, that run of the mill 'github projects' should not be added to Apache willy-nilly. I think this contribution however is not the run-of-the-mill type, nor are the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Naomi

Emmanuel, I understand where your opinions come from, and respect your arguments. I generally agree with your sentiments, that run of the mill 'github projects' should not be added to Apache willy-nilly. I think this contribution however is not the run-of-the-mill type, nor are the

Re: svn commit: r1697267 - in /commons/proper/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/bcel6: classfile/ generic/ verifier/structurals/

Revert if you like. I'm not sure how it breaks anything. On 09/09/2015 01:41 PM, sebb wrote: On 9 September 2015 at 17:57, Gary Gregory wrote: On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:19 AM, sebb wrote: PING. If I don't hear any response in the next few days I

Re: svn commit: r1697267 - in /commons/proper/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/bcel6: classfile/ generic/ verifier/structurals/

Revert if you like. I'm not sure how it breaks anything. The return type is not part of a method signature, so it doesn't break reflection. You can override with a method that returns Object. You can assign to object. so not sure the issue. But it's not a big deal so, whatever. On 09/09/2015

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

Perhaps i am blind, but i don't see any maven, ant or gradle build files. You really need to add these for your code base to be accessible to others wanted to uptake it. (Hopefully maven). --dave On 09/29/2015 06:55 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: Norman, Hello and welcome to Apache Commons. It's

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

into some sane will help get people to look at it. I'd again strongly recommend getting this into a maven standard project format. If you want help putting this project into a healthy state, layout/build wise let me know, i could spare a few cycles. --dave On 09/29/2015 08:11 PM, Dave

Re: Proposed Contribution to Apache Commons,

Added a pull request with a first pass at moving all of this to a maven build. builds and generates javadoc fine. Might need some more fine tuning. On 09/29/2015 08:27 PM, Dave Brosius wrote: Also the source code is not in the proper package structure. The class's have packages, but are just

Re: [Math] Utilitzation of SLF4J?

slf4j-api.jar also has no required dependencies. On 09/26/2015 06:14 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: The Log4j API has no dependencies. Log4j-core only requires log4j-api. It has lots of optional features and so has lots of optional dependencies, but none are required. Ralph On Sep 26, 2015, at

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi

Folks, I take it from our collective lack of movement, that we are voting no, and just not willing to say it. If that is the case, we should have the courtesy to say no, and at least give closure. dave On 11/08/2015 02:14 PM, Dave Brosius wrote: I have already merged the changes into master

Re: [JXPATH] Java Version

As has java 7 reached end of life. On 11/22/2015 09:06 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: I'm fine with Java 7, since Java 6 has already reached EOL. 2015-11-21 19:48 GMT+01:00 Gary Gregory : I'd go with Java 7. Gary On Nov 21, 2015 3:50 AM, "Benedikt Ritter"

Re: [BCEL] 5.3 is going to be messy

On 06/07/2016 06:39 AM, sebb wrote: On 7 June 2016 at 11:15, Torsten Curdt wrote: 1) I don't believe we should force users to migrate their code in order to support java 7/8. ...and that line of thinking is why it feels like commons projects are effectively stuck in the

Re: [bcel] Deprecated InstructionConstants

Commons should be happy to ignore compatibility, update to 1.8, change package and maven coordinates, change interfaces to take advantage of generics, become a modern code base. Staying in the 1.5 world, BCEL, which is already dying, will die. No competent developer coming in from the outside

Re: [Math] Change on branch "master": Commons Math MasterBranch - Build # 6 - Successful

ok, apologies. sorry On 05/29/2016 05:47 PM, Gilles wrote: Hi Dave. Please stop performing changes on the "master" branch! [See also my other mail.] Except for trivial modifications (e.g. typo in Javadoc), it was customary to file a JIRA report to link to the commit. A bunch of (even fairly

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons BCEL 6.0 based on RC5

+1 Am 18.06.2016 um 16:54 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: Hi, more then 10 years have passed since we've released BCEL 5.2. Users are waiting for us to release a new version capable of handling Java 6, 7 and 8 byte code. There have already been 4 release candidates for BCEL 6.0 but they have not

Re: [Math] Getting things done

I realize there are good intentions here. But what the common theme of all these email chains, when you filter out the disagreements, is, "deferred until" If 'deferring' is the only thing we can agree on, i think something is broken with the system. IMO let the doers do. Clearly Gilles is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons BCEL 6.0 based on RC6

Doubt it, but you could certainly 'shade ' the plugin with maven to convert all references from the original path to the path you're expecting. On 06/20/2016 07:14 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Sorry - I'm replying to my own post. Is there any

Re: [Math] About MATH-1329

Git blame says git blame -L1028 src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math4/linear/RealVector.java 760078b4 src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math/linear/RealVector.java (Gilles Sadowski 2011-08-28 12:58:57 + 1028) protected class Entry { Was like that from the first time it was added.

Re: [io] Make requirement Java 7?

:57, Dave Brosius a écrit : The extra management that's required is not worth the 2 people who want a new version of commons-io for java 6. We are talking about an end of life date coming up on 4 years. There is no extra management besides configuring the Maven compiler plugin to generate Java 6

Re: [io] Make requirement Java 7?

People stuck on Java 6, for whatever inane reason, are in a very restrictive use case, and as such are not likely doing 'progressive' things like upgrading 3rdparty jars. I just don't see the point of trying to support some of the new release's code base on java 6, and others on java 7. The

Re: [DISCUSS] Scala at Commons

+1 to adding scala (or other) language support. I'd just rather stay away from mixing languages in projects. On 02/12/2017 03:36 PM, Oliver Heger wrote: As we already host some C-code in Commons, I see no reason to reject Scala or other JVM languages. I have done some experiments with Scala

Re: Unsubscribe me

Hi Carrie, If you'd like to unsubscribe send an email to dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org On 09/06/2016 07:14 AM, carrie.ctr.w...@faa.gov wrote: -Original Message- From: brit...@apache.org [mailto:brit...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 1:18 PM To:

Re: [rng] Cleanup of "topic" branches

i'm not sure what the value of dead branch labels hanging around is. They just clutter things up and confuse new people coming it as to what to use. I'm +1 for deleting them. On 09/11/2016 02:26 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Gary Gregory

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

I'd vote for putting down the paint brushes temporarily and consider the bike shed done. Let's get 1.0 out, and then folks can work on 1.1 while getting feedback from users, etc. --dave --- On 2016-10-06 11:10, Gilles wrote: On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:04:43 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

you to want breaking changes anyway. I'd just release it, and get some momentum going. dave On 10/06/2016 01:36 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Dave Brosius <dbros...@apache.org> wrote: I'd vote for putting down the paint brushes temporarily and consider th

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

+1 On 09/16/2016 05:46 PM, Gilles wrote: Hi. This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2). Tag name: RNG_1_0_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v') Tag URL:

Re: FindBugs project announced as 'dead', blaims code rot and lack of maintainers

The problem is the admin/owner has left and refuses to give access to anyone else. The team has already decided to hard - fork, and is working to get set up. Anyone interested in joining is welcome. Contact me if interested. On 11/06/2016 12:32 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: See

Re: [lang] To Java 7

+1 On 10/23/2016 03:30 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: Hi All: Now that 3.5 is out, I think it is time to require Java 7. Thoughts? Gary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands,

Re: [lang] To Java 7

ctober 2016 at 14:59, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: +1, maybe there are some new features that can be added that are relevant to JDK 7 besides just language level cleanups. On 23 October 2016 at 07:07, Dave Brosius <dbros...@apache.org> wrote: +1 On 10/23/2016 03:30 AM,

Re: [ALL] Get things moving with "random utilities"

+1 --- On 2016-10-19 13:43, Jörg Schaible wrote: Hi, Gary Gregory wrote: To restate my opinion and that of others: It is not a good thing to end up with components Commons Random A, Commons Random B, Commons Random C, and so on. We already have a new Commons Random Something component.

Re: Help required for how to unsubscribe

send an email to dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org On 11/17/2016 11:06 PM, venkatesha murthy wrote: Please help. thanks venkat.

Re: [VOTE] Promote TEXT to Proper

+1 On 01/03/2017 02:39 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote: Hello all, I propose that we move [text] to Commons Proper. -- [ ] +1 Move [text] to Commons Proper [ ] +0 I am fine with this move [ ] -0 I am not too keen, because ... [ ] -1 I am

Re: Modern dependencies among commons

I have pushed a first patch to move in this direction with commons-beanutils https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEANUTILS-500 It is breaking in a couple deprecated methods, thus, targetted at a 2.0. given that, there are probably other things we'd want to do. On 07/27/2017 09:48 AM,

Modern dependencies among commons

Hi Folks, I'd like to see all of our common components uptake the 'latest' versions of other commons components, to encourage their adoption. For instance, commons-beanutils still uses commons-collections 3, and so when i want to use commons-collections4 myself, i now have to have both

Re: [collections][proposal] Java 7

+1 On 07/25/2017 06:18 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: Hi All: I propose we make Java 7 the minimum for Commons Collection 4.2. Gary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [collections][proposal] Java 7

+1 On 07/25/2017 06:18 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: Hi All: I propose we make Java 7 the minimum for Commons Collection 4.2. Gary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [All][Math] New component: "Commons Geometry"?

+1 On 08/17/2017 11:15 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: +1 Looks good to me. Gilles wrote: Hello. [Time for a new episode in our "Ripping CM" series.] How about creating "Commons Geometry"? The rationale is comprised of the usual suspects: * Smaller and more focused component, hence: -

Re: [All][Math] New component: "Commons Geometry"?

>> I get that what you are really trying to do is kill Commons Math off piece by piece. I just don’t agree with doing that. This is ridiculous. Giles is the primary person trying to keep some semblance of commons-math-like-stuff alive. He has asserted that there is no way he can maintain all

Re: [All][Math] New component: "Commons Geometry"?

So volunteers? Gary, Emmanuel, others?? are you up to doing this? On 08/31/2017 06:29 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 31/08/2017 à 23:33, Gilles a écrit : it's a pity we cannot meet in person to sort all those issues

Re: [BCEL] thread safety

The main issue was the static Repository, but instance based Repositories are available now. On 12/11/2017 11:26 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: It's been a looong time since I worked on BCEL and my memories might serve me wrong but I think thread safety is something that should not necessarily

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Migrate Apache Commons BCEL to git

+1 On 10/21/2017 10:19 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: +1 Gary On Oct 21, 2017 02:21, "Benedikt Ritter" wrote: Hello, I’d like to move Apache Commons BCEL codebase to git, so I’m calling a vote by lazy consensus. If nobody objects within the next 72 hours this vote passes and

Re: [collections] CollectionUtils not null-safe

This protection concept sounds perfectly rational, until you think of other obvious things that do similar things to protect the coder. myLong.equals(myString) doesn't throw an exception for instance, it just return false. but then you never know that you have a problem in your code and just

Re: [collections] Null-safe addAll(final Collection collection, final C... elements) [WAS] CollectionUtils not null-safe

!= null) { for (final C element : elements) { changed |= collection.add(element); } } return changed; } Which makes the method not blow up when either inputs is null. Gary On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Dave Brosiu

Re: [Net] When should we update net from Java 6 to 7?

I agree with this completely, it's also why moving to git is so important. On 01/13/2018 08:33 AM, Pascal Schumacher wrote: Am 13.01.2018 um 01:31 schrieb Gilles: On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 21:51:58 +0100, Pascal Schumacher wrote: imho we should drop support for java 6 and make every component java

[beanutils] release?

Given the lack of impetus around doing anything more grand with beanutils, can we put out the current state of beanutils as 2.0 so we can get rid of the old commons-collections dependency, and then if folks would like, we can think about moving on with what's on the alternative branch in the

Re: [beanutils] Toward 2.0.0

beanutils 3 exposed 'FastHashMap' which was a commons collections 3 data structure in it's own interface. That went away in commons collections 4, and so i modified the beanutils 4 interface to use ConcurrentHashMaps. Thus the need for a package rename. On 12/28/2017 04:56 PM, sebb wrote:

Re: [collections] breaking changes

i'm not sure i follow, don't we already have breaking changes for which we've decided to change bump the version? On 03/29/2018 11:00 PM, Paul King wrote: Just to clarify, when I said "It's built with gradle and uses Ant", I mean our build is gradle based and our call of Bridger uses Ant.