Hi Ralph,
Ralph Goers wrote at Mittwoch, 22. April 2009 05:19:
[snip]
Does it really matter that you understand what they are trying to do?
What should matter is what they are trying to do doesn't work properly
and they couldn't find a work around.
Did anyone of them ask here and try to
Vote passed, unanimous +1s. (I just hope I identified roles correctly
below...)
http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#commons
Joerg Schaible (Commons PMC)
Dan Fabulich (Commons Committer)
Liam Coughlin
Dave Miekle
Henri Yandell (Commons PMC)
Phil Steitz (Commons PMC)
Dan Fabulich
Phil Steitz wrote
We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
work on it (which means more than just oversight - more like active
involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we
- Bill Barker wbar...@wilshire.com a écrit :
I can't compile commons-math any longer due to the below errors. It
seems
that some 1.6 methods have creaped in. I have no problem upgrading to
1.6
if that is what is necessary, but I thought 1.5 was the targeted
version.
Yes, it is for
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 gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project commons-configuration-test has an issue affecting its community
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote
We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
work on it (which means more than just oversight - more like active
involvement). This is not a hard and
Phil Steitz wrote:
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote
We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
work on it (which means more than just oversight - more like active
involvement).
n 22/04/2009, Dan Fabulich d...@fabulich.com wrote:
I'm following the documentation here:
http://wiki.apache.org/commons/CreatingReleases
At step E.1 it says I'm supposed to Copy distributions to the Commons
dist/ area.
Copy what where exactly? There's a bunch of files here in:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Ralph,
Ralph Goers wrote at Mittwoch, 22. April 2009 05:19:
[snip]
Does it really matter that you understand what they are trying to do?
What should matter is what they are trying to do doesn't work
properly
and they couldn't find a
On 22/04/2009, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Ralph,
Ralph Goers wrote at Mittwoch, 22. April 2009 05:19:
[snip]
Does it really matter that you understand what they are trying to do?
What should matter is
Any comments ?
The original commit of the LICENSE file record is here:
http://markmail.org/message/u4q4gujknhwx3lwl
Jack Cai wrote:
I notice that there is a LICENSE file located at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/daemon/trunk/src/native/nt/procrun/LICENSE.
It includes the
Ralph Goers wrote:
I'm still at a loss as to how this conversation has devolved to this. This
post was meant as an example as to why yet another project is switching away
from Commons Logging.
You are right. I apologize for taking the discussion so far afield.
On Apr 22, 2009, at 7:38 AM, sebb wrote:
I could be wrong here, but it seems to me that SLF4J also relies on
the ClassLoader to find the implementation.
It's not clear whether Pluto would work if the properties file were
used to define the CL implementation.
It may be that CL cannot work
What if one would create an JCL 2.0 experimental branch?
Would that be OK for everyone?
cheers
--
Torsten
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Ralph Goers wrote:
What is next for Commons Logging? Is there any point in enhancing it to
emulate SLF4J? Should it just stay more or less as it is while it slowly
loses its customer base?
I think the most appropriate use case for Commons Logging always has been for
small components
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org wrote:
From: Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
To: Commons Developers List dev@commons.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 4:42 AM
Phil Steitz wrote
We have a rule
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Matt Benson gudnabr...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org wrote:
From: Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
To: Commons Developers List dev@commons.apache.org
OK, then here's what I think I want to do:
cd /www/www.apache.org/dist/commons/dbutils
rm *current*
cd binaries
cp
/www/people.apache.org/builds/commons/dbutils/1.2/RC3/staged/commons-dbutils/commons-dbutils/1.2/*bin*
.
cd ../source
cp
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Dan Fabulich d...@fabulich.com wrote:
OK, then here's what I think I want to do:
cd /www/www.apache.org/dist/commons/dbutils
rm *current*
snip/
Instead, for the symlinks, look in the committers SVN repo (under
tools/releases) -- theres a symlinks.sh that
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on Commons Wiki for
change notification.
The following page has been changed by sebbapache:
http://wiki.apache.org/commons/CreatingReleases
The comment on the change is:
Need to delete old releases
OK, so, my new plan is:
cd /www/www.apache.org/dist/commons/dbutils/binaries/
cp
/www/people.apache.org/builds/commons/dbutils/1.2/RC3/staged/commons-dbutils/commons-dbutils/1.2/*bin*
.
cd ../source
cp
21 matches
Mail list logo
