Re: [VOTE] Move Commons Math to TLP (again)...

I'm willing to help, but I'm not sure that I have voting privileges here since I don't have commit rights. -Rob > On Jun 12, 2016, at 1:43 PM, Jochen Wiedmann > wrote: > > +1 (I think, we could have that: Gilles, myself, and I am certain, > that a third person

Re: [VOTE] Move Commons Math to TLP (again)...

With all of that said, then I'm a: +1 (binding). -Rob > On Jun 12, 2016, at 9:27 PM, Niall Pemberton > wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Benson Margulies > wrote: > >> Procedurally speaking, I see no reason for this community to

Re: [Math] Commons Math (r)evolution

As someone relatively new to the project, I feel like my statement here may have a little weight. First, I do really want to help in whatever capacity I am able (given that I’m a tad over-run currently with a new[ish] 2-month-old baby). That said, I am perfectly willing to contribute in

Re: [VOTE] Move Commons Math to TLP (again)...

> On Jun 13, 2016, at 4:29 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 13 June 2016 at 03:06, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> With all of that said, then I'm a: +1 (binding). > > AIUI this is a Common vote, as such only PMC member votes are > con

Re: [math] Repository Policy

That seems reasonable based upon the other git based commons repos. -Rob > On May 31, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > > To reduce complexity and confusion, I would generally hope for > "master" to be where development happens, rather than an additional >

Re: [math] Repository Policy (was: Reverting changes on "master" as per Commons Math policy)

On May 31, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop to > master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow. Generally when I think about an arbitrary github project I would think that the

Re: [MATH] what a commons-TLP split could look like

> On Jun 21, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Hello. > > On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:58:40 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Hi Jochen, >> >> Jochen Wiedmann wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Jörg Schaible >>> wrote: >>>

Re: [Math] Getting things done

+1 - Tell me how I can help. I like the idea that we contribute a (or some) component(s) back to commons, but I think it makes a lot of sense to just work towards community future state before concerning ourselves with code future state, as that will happen naturally over time. -Rob > On Jun

Re: [VOTE] New component: Standard math functions

> On Jun 26, 2016, at 11:21 AM, Gilles wrote: > >> On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 12:35:38 +0200, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Gary Gregory >>> wrote: >>> One could argue that since Java has java.util.Random, Commons

Re: [Math] Feature development model: pull request?

Hey Gilles, Having been thinking about these sorts of ideas considerably in my day job, it might be worth considering adding some status checks for formatting. These aren’t too difficult to implement, but do require some mechanics. Its mainly having github POST to some configured url, and

Re: [Math] Feature development model: pull request?

All, I was thinking about this some over the weekend. How many of the contributors (those without commit access to the apache repository), do you think, will be accessing and submitting code via GitHub pull request? I ask because GitHub offers a template mechanism for pull requests.

Re: [Math] Jenkins problem (Was: [Math] Change on branch [...])

Honestly this seems to be an issue with the maven settings.xml on the server that ran the build. I’m guess that they were using the default maven settings.xml as opposed to the settings.xml that is needed for apache commons (which would contain the hashed credentials for the

Re: [Math] Expiry date for old issues

I would think something along the lines of: if an issues has not been apparently worked or or clearly commented on in some number of release cycles (maybe 2 or 3), then the issue should be able to be closed. > On Apr 23, 2016, at 6:26 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. >

Re: [Math] Git repository cleanup

If you aren't certain, you could create tags and delete branches. Just a thought, as a mechanism to minimize the number of branches in the repo. -Rob > On Apr 30, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. > > $ git branch -r > origin/3.6-release >

Re: [Math] Change on branch "develop": Commons Math DeveloperBranch - Build # 13 - Failure

The problem here seems to be that https://repository.apache.org is unavailable (serving 503s). So this failure is not related to the commits on the branch. If it builds locally, then I would not be all that concerned. -Rob > On May 14, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Gilles

[Math] Regarding Naming Conventions for Functions Multiplied By 1/x

Hi, I’m currently working on MATH-1359 which is working an analog of the relationship between sin(x) and sinx(x) = sin(x)/x but instead for log(1+x)

Re: [All] regarding the granting and revoking of commit privileges

've not seen a procedure to "fire" a person. > > Gary > >> On Jul 25, 2016 7:40 AM, "Mark Thomas" <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On 25/07/2016 15:34, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> As a relatively new

[All] regarding the granting and revoking of commit privileges

All, As a relatively new member to the community, I have yet see a vote on a committer come to pass, so you'll have to pardon my naivety on this matter. So the question at hand stems from a project at my day job. We, much like with commons, have the committing members of the project vote on

[LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

In short, I’m trying to generalize LANG-1060, LANG-1040, LANG-1038, and LANG-992 with a single issue that actually hits all the bases here with NumberUtils.isNumber. Bug (1): System.out.println(lang.math.NumberUtils.isNumber(“+2”)); > false while

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

Hi Benedikt, Thanks for the insights here. > On Jul 29, 2016, at 3:53 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hello Rob, > > Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com <mailto:chtom...@gmail.com>> schrieb am Do., > 28. Juli 2016 um > 14:23 Uhr: >

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

intent (that being that createNumber and isNumber as slightly different) or (2) Refactor the code so that they use the same checks to either return the boolean or create the number. Personally I’m indifferent, but I think those are the two different tacks we can take. -Rob > Gary > > On Jul 29,

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

the > method that parses the number. Furthermore it is clearer what isNumber > really does. Sure I'll see if I can get a pull request together that heads this direction. Would you refactor the unit test for isJavaNumberLiteral to not use parseNumber? -Rob > > Benedikt > > Rob

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

is way there would be a clearer connection between isParsebale and the > method that parses the number. Furthermore it is clearer what isNumber > really does. > > Benedikt > > Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 30. Juli 2016 um 21:17: > >> >>

Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?

> On Aug 1, 2016, at 10:58 PM, Artem Barger wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > It's been a while since there was a lot of hot discussion regarding the > future of the CM project, however I do not think that clear agreement was > reached. The reason I'm wondering is because I'd

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

> On Jul 31, 2016, at 3:03 PM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I figured that I would run an analogous test to the original with isParsable > and createNumber, and I ran into the following: > > System.out.println(NumberUtils.isParsable("+2"))

Re: commons-rng git commit: CheckStyle.

> On Aug 10, 2016, at 6:43 PM, Artem Barger wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Gilles > wrote: > >> But if all are happy to require Java 7, I wouldn't certainly >> oppose it! > > ​And what about going forward and switching to Java 8?

Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?

My overall impression about the problem is that we have a commons component that requires a considerable of non-java domain specific knowledge to make contributions. Thus, our general java expertise is not necessarily sufficient to vet contributions. From what I can tell, commons-math might be

Re: [5/7] [math] Fix "FastMath#round(..)" to comply to changed contract of "Math#round()" in Java 8

> On Aug 8, 2016, at 10:40 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > Le 8/08/2016 à 16:22, Gilles a écrit : > >> There are pro and contra; IMO, saving a few characters is not worth >> wondering upon reading whether "assertEquals" is from (JUnit) "Assert" >> or Commons Math "TestUtils".

Re: [DISCUSS] "Fraction" also in Commons Lang (Was: [VOTE] New component: Rational numbers)

I’m going to have a go at the implementation here. I figure we can talk more about it after we have a proposed solution in place. -Rob > On Jun 28, 2016, at 7:29 AM, Gilles wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:05:25 -0400, Matt Adereth wrote: >> Fraction in o.a.c.m.

Re: [VOTE] New component: Random number generators

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Artem Barger wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes > wrote: > >> On 21 Jun 2016 8:31 p.m., "Gilles" wrote: >> >>> Hello. >>> >>> This is one of several votes for

Re: [VOTE] New component: Rational numbers

be a valid Commons component. >>> [ x ] -1, this won't be a good Commons component because ... >>> >> >> Feels to much like a math component to me. Could better live in a Math TLP. > > Since there is a similar functionality in Commons Lang, I would >

Re: [VOTE] New component: Standard math functions

her than vote), please start a new > thread. > > Thank you, > Gilles > > >>On Monday, 27 June 2016 2:20 AM, Gilles >> <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 16:13:06 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>>&g

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] New component: Complex numbers

+1 [contributor] > On Jul 3, 2016, at 10:13 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Vote thread: > http://markmail.org/message/hwcydvqg7v2ypben > > +1 > Gilles Sadowski > Eric Barnhill > Stian Soiland-Reyes > > > Feel free to fill in any missing names. > People who forgot to

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

ou think that Bruno’s Locale based test-build issue is worth holding the release up over? -Rob > > On 6 February 2017 at 21:52, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 6, 2017, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >>&g

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

> On Feb 7, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi, > >> Am 07.02.2017 um 13:04 schrieb Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com>: >> >>> >>> On Feb 7, 2017, at 6:23 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: svn commit: r18200 - /dev/commons/text/

> On Feb 7, 2017, at 9:45 AM, sebb wrote: > > On 7 February 2017 at 12:12, wrote: >> Author: chtompki >> Date: Tue Feb 7 12:12:46 2017 >> New Revision: 18200 >> >> Log: >> fix: typographical error - staging commons-text artifacts' sha1 and md5 >>

Re: [TEXT] beta release notes

Agreed. -Rob > On Feb 7, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Agreed! > > Gary > >> On Feb 7, 2017 8:36 AM, "sebb" wrote: >> >> It occurs to me that the beta release will not be source or binary >> compatible with the first GA release

Re: svn commit: r18200 - /dev/commons/text/

> On Feb 7, 2017, at 10:19 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 7 February 2017 at 14:52, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 7, 2017, at 9:45 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 7 February 2017 a

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

Here’s my +1. -Rob > On Feb 8, 2017, at 2:54 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> Am 07.02.2017 um 14:21 schrieb Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com>: >> >>> >>> On Feb 7, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

Hello, This vote passes with (in order of appearance): Oliver Heger: +1 Benedikt Ritter: +1 Thomas Vandahl: +1 Rob Tompkins: +1 I'll proceed with the release procedure. Thanks to all who reviewed this and the last RC. -Rob > On Jan 30, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gma

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

> On Feb 8, 2017, at 7:17 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 8 February 2017 at 17:51, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> This vote passes with (in order of appearance): >> >> Oliver Heger: +1 >> B

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 (from RC4). > > Tag name: > commons-text-1.0-beta-1-RC4 (signature can be checked from git using

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

uld be fixed for the GA release. Valuable notes here. Glad I'm doing a beta (thanks Emmanuel for the suggestion) as opposed to a GA release. -Rob > > +1 > > Benedikt > >> Am 30.01.2017 um 15:14 schrieb Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com>: >> >> He

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

time, as well as the locale (or so >> I think). Here's my output of running the `locale` command. >> >> /* --- snip --- */ >> $ locale >> LANG=en_US.UTF-8 >> LANGUAGE=en_US >> LC_CTYPE=pt_BR.UTF-8 >> LC_NUMERIC=pt_BR.UTF-8 >> LC_TIME=pt_B

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

> On Feb 8, 2017, at 2:54 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> Am 07.02.2017 um 14:21 schrieb Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com>: >> >>> >>> On Feb 7, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons JCS 2.1 based on RC1

Build works on Mac, Java 6, 7, 8. Site seems to only work on 7 (but that’s been mentioned already). Artifacts look good, site looks good. +1 > On Feb 5, 2017, at 12:24 PM, Thomas Vandahl wrote: > > I would like to release the [jcs] component to resolve some bugs > > Apache

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Configuration 2.1.1 based on RC1

Build works fine with Java 1.6, 1.7, and 1.8 on Mac OS X 10.12.3. Artifacts and site look good. +1 -Rob > On Feb 5, 2017, at 9:23 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hi, > > we’ve fixed some bugs since the release of Commons Configuration 2.1 so I’d > like to call a vote to

Re: [CONFIGURATION] Ready for 2.2 release?

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 3:18 PM, Oliver Heger wrote: > > > > Am 03.02.2017 um 12:24 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: >> Hi, >> >> I need some fixes from trunk in one of my projects. Since I’ve not been >> involved in the development of [CONFIGURATION], I’d like to ask

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

> On Feb 2, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 10:41:17 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Jan 30, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hello all, >>> &

[text] Preparing for the 1.0 release.

All, I plan on attempting a go at the 1.0 release for [text] over the next few days. If there are any concerns or thoughts please let me know. Cheers, -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For

Re: [text] Preparing for the 1.0 release.

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 7:37 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > > Le 23/01/2017 à 13:33, Rob Tompkins a écrit : > >> I plan on attempting a go at the 1.0 release for [text] over the next few >> days. If there are any concerns or thoughts please le

Re: [text] Preparing for the 1.0 release.

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 8:04 AM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 23, 2017, at 7:37 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Le 23/01/2017 à 13:33, Rob Tompkins a écrit : >> >>> I plan on attempting a go at

Re: [text] Preparing for the 1.0 release.

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 7:37 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > > Le 23/01/2017 à 13:33, Rob Tompkins a écrit : > >> I plan on attempting a go at the 1.0 release for [text] over the next few >> days. If there are any concerns or thoughts please le

[VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC2

Hello all, This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 (from RC2). Tag name: commons-text-1.0-beta-1-RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v') Tag URL:

Re: [Text] Consider making the project "multimodule"

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. > > I think that it would be worth modularizing the [Text] component. > I only had quick glances, but it seems that some codes are more > generic than others (that e.g. focused on HTML entities). I lean towards

[VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC4

Hello all, This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 (from RC4). Tag name: commons-text-1.0-beta-1-RC4 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v') Tag URL:

Re: [Text] New feature: Parsing and formatting numbers (Was: Consider making the project "multimodule")

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 7:47 PM, Gilles wrote: > >> On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 14:46:25 +0100, Gilles wrote: >> Hi. >> >> I think that it would be worth modularizing the [Text] component. >> I only had quick glances, but it seems that some codes are more >> generic than

[CANCEL][VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC2

> On Jan 27, 2017, at 12:51 PM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jan 27, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Oliver Heger <oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> build works with Java 1.7 and 1.8

Re: StringUtils.isEmpty() family of methods on Objects

> On Jan 29, 2017, at 9:24 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I know someone would reply with some Java 8 lamba... but that will never be > as easy to ready as a method name like isEmpty or hasSomething... > At my day job a bunch of folks got giddy over the new java 8

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 based on RC2

if so if there are any issues other than those brought up here by Oliver. -Rob > Oliver > >> Am 26.01.2017 um 12:29 schrieb Rob Tompkins: >> Hello all, >> >> This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 (from RC2). >> >> Tag name: >

Re: [text] shade plugin into beta package

ree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-text/tree/736326bf > Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-text/diff/736326bf > > Branch: refs/heads/master > Commit: 736326bffc40c36c29e8bd718739eec4948cb814 > Parents: 74bf2cf > Author: Rob Tompkins <chtom...@

Re: [text] On the value of idempotent string escape methods?

string. Again, this feels contrived, so I’m not really suggesting that we add it. I’m just playing with ideas here that could accomplish what Sampanna is going for. -Rob > > The most one can do is to sanitise the string by escaping anything > that is unescaped. > However tha

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: commons-validator #39

I actually get this error when I attempt any maven execution on my machine OS X 10.12.3 using maven 3.3.9 and: $java -version java version "1.6.0_65" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_65-b14-468-11M4833) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 20.65-b04-468, mixed mode) It feels to

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: commons-validator #39

> On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:48 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 21 February 2017 at 15:20, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@apache.org > <mailto:chtom...@apache.org>> wrote: >> I actually get this error when I attempt any maven execution on my machin

Re: [text] On the value of idempotent string escape methods?

> On Feb 20, 2017, at 10:30 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 20 February 2017 at 14:55, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 20, 2017, at 4:31 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 19 February 201

Re: [text] On the value of idempotent string escape methods?

y was trying to get to a potentially valuable stateless idempotent string escape function. Its contrivance it quite clear. Any other comments out there? We could provide a stateful escaper (that figures out how many escapes a string is in), or a method that returns the number of escapes in a strin

[text] Preparing for 1.0

Hello, I am thinking about preparing for the 1.0 release some time in the next week or so, and I wanted to see if anyone had any issues aside from TEXT-40 with the beta. Many thanks to Sebb for resolving that one. I’ve remediated the checkstyle issues and a few pmd issues. But, I thought I

[text] On the value of idempotent string escape methods?

In preparation for the 1.0 release, I think we should address Sebb's concern in TEXT-40 about the attempt to create "idempotent" string escape methods. By idempotent I mean someMethod("some string") = someMethod(someMethod(someMethod(...someMethod("some string", a single application of a

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: commons-validator #39

> On Feb 21, 2017, at 11:04 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 21 February 2017 at 15:53, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:48 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Scala at Commons

> On Feb 12, 2017, at 10:52 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hello, > > Commons mission has always been to provide a home for common _Java_ libraries. It's seemed slightly odd to me that there weren't more supported languages represented in Commons. Scala seems like a

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 released!

/text/RELEASE-NOTES.txt For complete information on Commons Text, including instructions on how to submit bug reports, patches, or suggestions for improvement, see the Apache Commons Text website: http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-text/ Best regards, Rob Tompkins on behalf of the Apache

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Commons Text 1.0-beta-1 released!

/text/RELEASE-NOTES.txt For complete information on Commons Text, including instructions on how to submit bug reports, patches, or suggestions for improvement, see the Apache Commons Text website: http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-text/ Best regards, Rob Tompkins on behalf of the Apache

Re: [text] Preparing for the 1.0 release.

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 1:22 PM, Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumac...@gmx.net> > wrote: > > +1 to upgrading jacoco > Sounds good. I'll do that and set the packages up as beta. Should I simply version the artifact version as 1.0-beta-1? -Rob >> Am 23.01.2017 um

Re: [VOTE] Release Validator 1.6 based on RC1

Artifacts and site look good. Builds using great java 1.6, 1.7, and 1.8. Site builds for 1.7 and 1.8. +1 (non-binding) -Rob > On Feb 16, 2017, at 7:50 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > +1 > > From the src zip: MD5 OK, SHA1 OK, ASC OK. > > RAT check OK. > CLIRR check OK. >

Re: [rng] Travis ?

> On Aug 21, 2016, at 4:43 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > Hi. > > On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 21:45:53 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Just

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

> On Aug 18, 2016, at 3:10 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> On Jul 31, 2016, at 3:03 PM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [rng] Travis ?

I’m fairly familiar with build tools like travis, if you want me to look into it I can. -Rob > On Aug 19, 2016, at 8:06 PM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. > > Does someone know how this > https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-rng > appeared and how to make it reflect the

Re: [rng] Travis ?

> On Aug 20, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> wrote: > > Just add the build configuration (.travis.yml) to the repo and ask INFRA to > enable it. > > On Aug 20, 2016 03:31, "Gilles" <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >

Re: [rng] Travis ?

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 9:19 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 07:57:00 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >> Hey Gilles, >> >> I switched the coveralls reporting portion of the travis build back >> from cobertura

Re: [rng] Travis ?

omelinux.org> wrote: > > Hi. > > On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 21:45:53 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Just add the build configuration (.travis.yml) to the repo and ask INFRA to

[text] TEXT-64, ExtendedMessageFormat Locale.getDefault() handling

Hello all, In researching the build issue that Bruno came across in the release of text-1.0-beta-1, I’ve discovered that it seems that java.text.MessageFormat(String pattern) differs in its retrieval of the default locale from out org.apache.commons.text.ExtendedMessageFormat in that it calls

Re: [text] TEXT-64, ExtendedMessageFormat Locale.getDefault() handling

way to define the global category during the tests. As is now, the test > retrieves a list of locales, which are not aware of the category type. When > we format the text with our pattern, the locale keeps platform-dependent. So > in my case, it will format the date for Portuguese). &

Re: [rng] Coveralls ? (Was: Travis ?)

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 6:06 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:24:15 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Aug 21, 2016, at 4:11 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 20 Aug 201

Re: [rng] Travis ?

n analogous Jira request to INFRA. Thoughts? -Rob > > Gilles > >> >> On Aug 20, 2016 03:31, "Gilles" <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:44:46 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> >>>> I’m fairly famili

Re: [LANG] LANG-1252 - NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently

another set of eyes on the work. Cheers, -Rob > On Aug 19, 2016, at 4:53 PM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Aug 18, 2016, at 3:10 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Bened

Re: [ALL] Discuss logo change

> On Sep 3, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Well, the ASF has decided to use a new logo. Since we use the feather in > our logo it seems logical to me, that we incorporate the new feather. +1 for incorporating the new feather. > > Benedikt > > Ralph Goers

Re: [VOTE][RC1] Release Commons Rng 1.0

+1 > On Sep 11, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. > > This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Rng 1.0 (from RC1). > > Tag name: > RNG_1_0_RC1 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v') > > Tag URL: > >

Re: [rng] Cleanup of "topic" branches

+1 for removal. > On Sep 11, 2016, at 11:32 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Once a branch has been merged into master, I think it is OK to remove it. > Otherwise, IMO it's on a case by case basis: Does the author of the branch > need it? > > Gary > > On Sun, Sep 11, 2016

Re: [LANG] Add alphabet conversion API

> On Sep 13, 2016, at 4:39 AM, Eyal Allweil > wrote: > > I've created a JIRA issue, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-1266, > and a pull request for this: https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/188 > Regards,Eyal > > > > >On Wednesday,

Re: [LANG] Towards 3.5

I'll dig in and have a look at it. -Rob > On Sep 26, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > Hi all, > > as you might have noticed, there has been no RC1 on Saturday :-) I've > decided that I'd like to fix LANG-1265 [1] for 3.5 to have full Java 9 > support. If

Re: [MATH] Thoughts on some short term goals?

> On Sep 18, 2016, at 7:22 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > Hello. > > On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 16:07:41 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Hi Rob, >> >> Rob Tompkins wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Given that th

Re: [math] Change on "master" (Was: [10/10] [math] Remove redundant ...)

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Gilles wrote: > >> On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 06:40:40 -, ggreg...@apache.org wrote: >> Remove redundant type arguments. >> >> Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-math/repo >> Commit:

Re: [math] Change on "master" (Was: [10/10] [math] Remove redundant ...)

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Sep 20, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org&g

[MATH] Thoughts on some short term goals?

Hello, Given that the long term goals of commons-math are fairly uncertain, I would like to attempt working with some short term goals. The hope here is to think about questions along the lines of: "what can be done today/this week/this month,” with the goal aiming at chipping away at what

Re: [Math] Build fails on Travis

> On Aug 27, 2016, at 4:53 PM, Gilles wrote: > > Hi. > > See e.g. > https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-math/jobs/155632094 > > The job log indicates: "Killed". :-( > Hm…that error doesn’t immediately ring any bells for me. Any opinions or enabling debug

Re: [rng] Travis ?

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:17 PM, Artem Barger <ar...@bargr.net> wrote: > > > > >> 22 авг. 2016 г., в 20:08, Rob Tompkins <chtom...@gmail.com> написал(а): >> >> Sure. That’s not a problem at all. Currently we have in the pom.xml, >> che

Re: [rng] Travis ?

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:47:43 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote: >>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 9:19 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 22 Aug 2016

Re: [LANG] Towards 3.5

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:36 AM, Charles Honton wrote: > There are multiple causes to LANG-1265. The two I have traced look like > incomplete locale/timezone data from the CLDR provider. I recommend > moving forward on 3.5 release without solving LANG-1265. > > I agree with

Re: [VOTE][LAZY] Move Apache Commons EL to dormant

> On Sep 25, 2016, at 11:23 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > We could add a link to Tomcat's EL library on the Commons EL page, too. I'm > not sure if this always happens, but I think it would be a good idea if > dormant projects link to successors or alternatives. +1 on linking

Re: [complex] commons-complex module

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 5:59 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I am against spinning out org.apache.commons.math4.complex out into yet > another component. The argument that Gilles refuses to > support org.apache.commons.math4.complex because he does not want to > support all of

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >