DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37709.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37710.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37711.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37713.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37714.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-xml-test has an issue affecting its community
integration.
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-xml-test has an issue affecting its community
integration.
I have a number of proposals to change the Commons Resources API. Some of
these were raised/discussed in the following thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-dev%40jakarta.apache.org/msg70528.html
Rather than creating either a massive thread or many threads that could get
lost in the noise
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-swing has an issue affecting its community
integration.
This
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-swing has an issue affecting its community
integration.
This
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-define-test has an issue affecting its community
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-define-test has an issue affecting its community
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-jsl-test has an issue affecting its community
integration.
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-jsl-test has an issue affecting its community
integration.
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-html has an issue affecting its community
integration.
This
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly-tags-html has an issue affecting its community
integration.
This
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
Oliver
Oliver Heger wrote:
Since the 1.1 release of Configuration we have implemented a couple of fixes
and added some new features. To make these enhancements available
+0
Jakarta Commons Developers List commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
Oliver
Oliver Heger wrote:
Since the 1.1 release of Configuration we have implemented
+0
Jakarta Commons Developers List commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
Oliver
Oliver Heger wrote:
Since the 1.1 release of Configuration we have implemented
Hi Oliver,
here is the stack trace, it happened again :(
The interesting thing is that when i artificially slow down our
throughoutput, it never happens. When i set it loose (with highest
throughoutput) it usually happens. This stack trace is from i386 Linux
2.4, but we noticed the same on
Hi!
This is almost the same patch as last time, but with some refinements
about lockOwner etc
Just to be able to see what is running in the previous stack trace, but
as far as i see, the ERR_SYSTEM is unaffected by this patch.
tx
~t~
Index:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30375.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Author: ozeigermann
Date: Wed Nov 30 09:26:20 2005
New Revision: 349996
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=349996view=rev
Log:
Better error reporting in FileHelper#moveRec when destination directories could
not be created
Modified:
Author: ozeigermann
Date: Wed Nov 30 09:29:27 2005
New Revision: 349997
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=349997view=rev
Log:
Fix of previous fix :(
Modified:
jakarta/commons/proper/transaction/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/transaction/util/FileHelper.java
Modified:
Hi Tamas!
This looks as if the directory (or the file) has not been created.
Commons transaction should throw an exception in that case. Not quite
sure where that should be, though. Anyway, just committed a change
that adds a check at the suspectedly right position. Please try that.
Another
Author: ozeigermann
Date: Wed Nov 30 09:36:48 2005
New Revision: 35
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=35view=rev
Log:
Better error reporting in FileHelper#copyRec when destination file could not be
created
Modified:
jakarta/commons/proper/transaction/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
Hmmm. This seems to be a mixture of all kinds of patches, most of them
not applicable (any more).
Concerning the one for GenericLockManager: That would make sense, but
as I already described in one of my previous posts, I would not want
to have that in the lock manager. But you can easily add
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 23:31 -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
+1 to the new library.
I'm wondering if we reach a point where Collections wants Primitives
and Collections-Functor as subcomponents. Tricky to handle with our
current setup, but maybe an idea for the future.
i once thought that
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 19:38 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Thanks, Stephen. While I still think 1, 5 are problematic, your
responses to the other points are enough to move me to +1
Phil
On 11/29/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote:
-0 for following reasons:
Oliver Heger wrote:
---
[ ] +1 I support this release and am willing to help
[X] +0 I support this release but am unable to help
[ ] -0 I do not support this release
[ ] -1 I do not support this release, and here are my reasons
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 15:09 +, Tim Roberts wrote:
+1 I support creating a functors library (but not necessarily called
collections-functors).
Rational:
I think functors are a powerful approach to software design, under
represented (in java) and non-standardised. I would like to see
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 15:09 +, Tim Roberts wrote:
+1 I support creating a functors library (but not necessarily called
collections-functors).
Rational:
I think functors are a powerful approach to software design, under
represented (in java) and
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 15:07 +0100, Oliver Heger wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
sorry for join a little late :-/
hopefully stephen, phil and the rest of the release experts will jump in
sometime
robert burrell donkin wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
3 the release has been compiled using 1.4.2: if commons-configuration is
supposed to support 1.3 jdks then this could be a problem unless
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 22:32 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
3 the release has been compiled using 1.4.2: if commons-configuration
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:17 -0500, Michael Heuer wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 15:09 +, Tim Roberts wrote:
+1 I support creating a functors library (but not necessarily called
collections-functors).
Rational:
I think functors are a powerful
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37724.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
I've been working on a library I aim to contribute to the commons
bazaar (as a standalone lib or maybe as part of commons-transform), but:
- I'm not sure mine is a good idea for a commons library
- I'm not a commons committer
- The lib still needs work (it is a prototype right now)
The library,
I believe Jakarta Commons (especially the sandbox) is one of the
wonderful playgrounds we have under the Apache umbrella. Having
started a sandbox project recently, I continue to be amazed by the
Commons community and its responsiveness in day-to-day operations.
I'm also seeing a trend that is a
Recently, while looking at a codebase that uses Commons Chain, I was
drawn to the top commit message for ContextBase [1].
I'm interested in knowing what the developer (and user too) opinions
are on this topic. Has anybody made any progress on this?
Does anyone have a preference among -
* Keep
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37727.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Oddly enough, I have spent the last week point five
working on a similar setup at $work. My syntax is
slightly different (extended I would say). If this
proposal is accepted in principle, I could query my
boss whether we could make any contributions. As an
Apache committer, I believe I have the
On 11/30/05, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oddly enough, I have spent the last week point five
working on a similar setup at $work. My syntax is
slightly different (extended I would say). If this
proposal is accepted in principle, I could query my
boss whether we could make any
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37711.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Author: martinc
Date: Wed Nov 30 16:56:20 2005
New Revision: 350090
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=350090view=rev
Log:
Bugzilla #37706 - Remove Javadoc warnings.
Modified:
jakarta/commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/fileupload/portlet/PortletFileUpload.java
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37706.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
The HiveMind library already supports something like this. Maybe we could
lean on that work also. The prefixes are associated with object providers
which know how to translate a locator string (the rest of the expression)
into an object.
-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Gallo
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37727.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
I'm also seeing a trend that is a tad disappointing. The last three
successive release votes each needed to make pleas for a better
response from the developer community.
I'm afraid it might be easy to misunderstand or ridicule this email,
point to the some Apache voting
robert burrell donkin wrote:
[sandbox-functor] has *nothing* in common with [collection-functor]. Nor
is it going to. The source and approaches are just different.
is see that as a good thing, not bad :)
thinking back, one of the sources of arguments about functors has been
that the functors
On 12/1/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Release managers are also facing tougher release checkers now IMHO. For
instance, I haven't ignored configuration, but haven't had the time to
check it out properly (way too much to do). I try to only give a +1 if I
genuinely am happy.
Steve Cohen wrote:
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Steve Cohen wrote:
It has been discovered that 1.4.0 is inadvertently incompatible with
jdk 1.3. Please vote on a release of a fixed version.
Checked VFS using net svn head and it works.
So here is my +1
BTW: maven builds a 1.5.0 version
On 11/30/05, Rahul Akolkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Recently, while looking at a codebase that uses Commons Chain, I was
drawn to the top commit message for ContextBase [1].
I'm interested in knowing what the developer (and user too) opinions
are on this topic. Has anybody made any progress
On 11/30/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/1/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Release managers are also facing tougher release checkers now IMHO. For
instance, I haven't ignored configuration, but haven't had the time to
check it out properly (way too much
On 11/30/05, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/30/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/1/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Release managers are also facing tougher release checkers now IMHO. For
instance, I haven't ignored configuration, but
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37690.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Steve Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I have little time now, I propose the following. 1.4.1 will be
just 1.4.0 with whatever changes are needed to reverse the
dependency on jdk 1.4.x. No other bug fixes will be included.
Re-vote
+1 [yes]
-1 [no]
+1
Stefan
[snip]
As I have little time now, I propose the following. 1.4.1 will be just
1.4.0 with whatever changes are needed to reverse the dependency on jdk
1.4.x. No other bug fixes will be included.
Re-vote
+1 [yes]
-1 [no]
+1.
--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
You are going to let
Author: dion
Date: Wed Nov 30 21:12:28 2005
New Revision: 350166
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=350166view=rev
Log:
Use groupId/artifactId consistently instead of simply id
Modified:
jakarta/commons/proper/jelly/trunk/jelly-tags/swt/project.xml
Modified:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37731.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37731.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37731.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37727.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
On 11/30/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/30/05, Rahul Akolkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Recently, while looking at a codebase that uses Commons Chain, I was
drawn to the top commit message for ContextBase [1].
I'm interested in knowing what the developer (and user too)
Steve Cohen wrote:
As I have little time now, I propose the following. 1.4.1 will be
just 1.4.0 with whatever changes are needed to reverse the dependency
on jdk 1.4.x. No other bug fixes will be included.
Re-vote
+1 [yes]
-1 [no]
+1
---
Mario
Phil Steitz wrote:
For me +1 means pretty much what Martin describes above. I check the
release contents, make sure required elements are there and in jars,
make sure there is nothing funny included. I test the builds,
validate sigs, etc and inspect the web site and, if present,
clirr/jdiff
Hi Giorgio!
Its purpose is to parse URI-like strings (anything in the form
somescheme:somestring) into java objects according to a
scheme-specific syntax (which is straightforward in most cases)
Do you plan to support the full URI specification of do you simply use
the : as delimiter ;-)
But
robert burrell donkin schrieb:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 22:32 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
There has been no reaction on this vote thread so far.
Will I have to cancel this release because of lack of interest? :-(
3 the release has been compiled using
Author: martinc
Date: Wed Nov 30 23:10:29 2005
New Revision: 350197
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=350197view=rev
Log:
Fix Checkstyle warnings.
Modified:
jakarta/commons/proper/fileupload/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/fileupload/FileUploadBase.java
71 matches
Mail list logo
