The Apache Commons team is pleased to announce the Apache Commons
Digester 3.2 release!
The Apache Commons Digester package lets you configure an XML to Java
object mapping module which triggers certain actions called
ruleswhenever a particular pattern of nested XML elements is
recognized.
The
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
DBCP 1.4 currently creates an instance of
GenericKeyedObjectPoolFactory, which it then uses via the interface
Hi,
trying to put it all together (thanks James, Matthew):
* WeightedW is fully generic without restrictions on the type of
weight W
* different properties of weights are specified with interfaces: e.g.
Summable, HasZero, Comparable...
* each algorithm requires the weights to
I don't like the idea of pushing the adding, comparing, etc. into the
weights. I like the idea of having operations external to the weights
that take care of that stuff.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Claudio Squarcella
squar...@dia.uniroma3.it wrote:
Hey Simone,
On 12/12/2011 18:35,
Hello,
cool, thanks for the update. If you run out of time for some reason or
see any other problems with the import, pls let me/us know. I gladly
dedicate the cmd-c/cmd-v operations of the next days to ognl.
Cheers
Christian
2011/12/14 Łukasz Lenart lukasz.len...@googlemail.com:
Hello,
I
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
SharedPoolDataSource.registerPool() creates an instance of
On 13 December 2011 20:25, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 13/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
I've added some Javadoc to classes to indicate which ones are supposed
to be thread-safe and which are not.
AFAICT, there remain 2 classes to be dealt with, ie
GenericKeyedObjectPool (GKOP)
and
Hi,
On 14/12/2011 12:34, James Carman wrote:
I don't like the idea of pushing the adding, comparing, etc. into the
weights. I like the idea of having operations external to the weights
that take care of that stuff.
I would be happy with non-polluted weights, so I am with you. But I am
not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Are there any plans to update dbcp to support the new features in
Java7/JDBC4.1?
- --
James Page
Ubuntu Core Developer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
On 14/12/2011 09:23, sebb wrote:
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
You need to look at DBCP trunk that uses POOL 2. There has been quite a
lot of
On 14 December 2011 17:01, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 14/12/2011 09:23, sebb wrote:
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
You need to look
On 12/13/11 3:34 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote:
This is a patch release, including a couple of bug fixes.
The release artifacts are here:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool-1.5.7-rc3/
Release notes:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool-1.5.7-rc3/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
This vote has passed, with +1 votes from
psteitz
luc
grobmeier
joerg
+0 votes from
sebb
ggregory
and not other votes.
Thanks to all who reviewed the RC.
I am traveling with limited access the next couple of days, so I
will wait to move publish the release until this weekend.
Phil
On 12/10/11
On 12/14/11 5:10 AM, sebb wrote:
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
On 14/12/2011 17:27, sebb wrote:
On 14 December 2011 17:01, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 14/12/2011 09:23, sebb wrote:
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPoolFactory
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which
On 14/12/2011 12:10, sebb wrote:
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
On 14 December 2011 18:29, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 14/12/2011 12:10, sebb wrote:
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool
I've
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=15866projectId=98
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Wed 14 Dec 2011 20:51:48 +
Finished at: Wed 14 Dec 2011 20:52:07 +
Total time: 18s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
On Dec 14, 2011, at 14:12, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 December 2011 18:29, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 14/12/2011 12:10, sebb wrote:
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations.
I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the
[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e.
Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool
I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x.
Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is my +1
Could use a couple of more so the bug fixes can go out and we can
proceed to a patch release for [dbcp] 1.3/1.4.
Phil
On 12/10/11 5:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
This is a patch release, including a couple of bug fixes.
The release
On 14/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
On 14 December 2011 18:29, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
JNDI assumes resources are essentially beans i.e. have zero argument
constructors and getters/setters. If this is not the case then some
extra plumbing is required. The further G[K]OP gets from a
On 14 December 2011 22:22, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 14/12/2011 19:12, sebb wrote:
On 14 December 2011 18:29, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
JNDI assumes resources are essentially beans i.e. have zero argument
constructors and getters/setters. If this is not the case then
Anyone have any idea on this? Should I be seeing basic auth for my
challenge? Where can I set the password as I was never prompted to
enter it.
At this point, can someone else deploy RC1 while I figure out what is
wrong on my end?
Thanks...
Bill-
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 4:32 PM, William Speirs
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-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
25 matches
Mail list logo
