Ah, well, in that sprit, then comments on http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22719 would be appreciated but I do not expect this to go in 2.0 unless other folks like/need it.
Looks useful to me. I would go ahead and add it. Here are a couple of small comments:
1. Yes, the name sucks, but nothing nice jumps out at me. Of the alternatives that you have listed, I like "indexOfOccurrence" the best. Another one to consider might be "ordinalIndexOf".
2. Make sure to change the method names in the javadoc examples to match the chosen name. Also, the last two examples should probably be replaced by one using a * for the integer argument.
Phil
Gary
-----Original Message----- From: Phil Steitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 20:24 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
Gary Gregory wrote:
I'll take the blame for causing any confusion on this one since I had committed these Javadoc changes "during" the vote, which was made more difficult due to the extremely long email delays caused by the current
batch
of viruses going 'round.
My thought was that we were indeed voting on the build based on tagged sources and that any new commits would be in a post >2.0 release (even though, these changes being Javadoc changes are "harmless" and
beneficial to
the release IMHO ;-)
If we want to implement a code freeze in our environment on top of using tags, we could do that. I guess we'd have to vote on it too :-)
Sorry if I misunderstood things. I thought we were still adding things to the release. I see no reason to freeze code if we have a tagged release. I am +1 for releasing the code prior to the javadoc changes that occurred during the vote or to adding them and retagging. If that requires a new vote, then I am OK with that as well.
In any case, we should not have to stop everything as we wait for the release to go. I would also very much like to see 2.0 get out the door.
Phil
GaryI
-----Original Message----- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 00:00 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
Well, if there is a question about policy/process, why not just freeze
the
code and restart the vote?
By tagging the CVS, he effectively has frozen the code for the Release.
arewas simply curious about the policy because, as I said, other projects
alpha.stricter. For example the HTTPd team has different rules (http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html).
A Release Manager makes a release build, and it is automatically an
+1It becomes a beta release when at least three Committers have voted beta status, and there are more +1 than -1. It becomes a GA release when at least three Committers vote for GA (stable) status, and there are more
tarballthan -1. Notice that -1 is not a veto. Notice, also, that the package itself may go through multiple status changes, but no packaging changes. The only allowable change is renaming the file to reflect the change in status; exceptions can be made if a change in the contents of the
in(e.g., someone forgot to add the LICENSE file). Otherwise, if a change
athe CVS needs to be incorporated, it becomes a new release (with a new vote).
Other projects, such as Avalon, also roll jars and then vote on them as
policyRelease. So I was just asking to understand what is established as
here. I wasn't challenging Henri's release.
--- Noel
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
