On 2016-03-30, Gary Gregory wrote:
> "Foo 1.2 RC1 is available for review here:"
> ;-)
I plead guilty on the crime of copy-paste reuse.
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional command
I don’t know if it needs a formal vote, but the responses make it look like it
is. I also prefer Apache Commons Crypto.
Ralph
> On Mar 30, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> Ralph Goers schrieb am Mi., 30. März 2016 um
> 17:55 Uhr:
>
>> Is this a vote thread?
>>
>
"Foo 1.2 RC1 is available for review here:"
;-)
G
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Foo 1.2 RC1 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/
> (svn revision 12931)
>
> Maven artifacts are here:
>
> https://re
Hi Ralph,
Ralph Goers schrieb am Mi., 30. März 2016 um
17:55 Uhr:
> Is this a vote thread?
>
No it isn't. I thought it would be enough gather ideas and choose the one
with the most nominations.
Would you rather like to see a formal vote?
Benedikt
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:30 PM,
Is this a vote thread?
Ralph
> On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Gangumalla, Uma wrote:
>
> Just collected all the proposed names here for tracking purpose at single
> place:
>
> Apache Commons Crypto
> Apache Commons Crypto Libs
> Apache Commons Crypto Extensions
> Apache Commons AES
> Apache Comm
+1 from me
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Foo 1.2 RC1 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/
> (svn revision 12931)
>
> Maven artifacts are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositorie
Hi all
Foo 1.2 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/compress/
(svn revision 12931)
Maven artifacts are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1144/org/apache/commons/commons-compress/1.11/
Details of chan
On 2016-03-28, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 27/03/2016 18:41, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
>> Is this a feature we generally want to see in compress? And if so, does
>> the branch make sense or should we tackle this in a different way?
> I like the idea of progress tracking, and the implementation on