I believe this could be addressed by changing the pom to only include Xerces
and XML-APIs when compiling with JDK 5+ with a desired target of JDK 5+ and
then having the unit tests that use validation only run when Java 5+ is
enabled. However, this seems like a lot of work for little benefit
Henri Yandell a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Paul Benedict pbened...@apache.org wrote:
This is how I believe the commons.lang.math package can be eliminated.
Based on the current 3.0-SNAPSHOT API, there are only three classes
left:
Fraction
IEEE754rUtils
NumberUtils
1)
Henri Yandell schrieb:
What would a dependency of 1.5 mean with regards to the Xerces dependency?
You depend on Lang/Collections, and both are 1.5 dependent for their
next version.
With 1.5 the Xerces dependency is no more needed.
There is some work going on for a Configuration 2.0 version
Ralph Goers schrieb:
I believe this could be addressed by changing the pom to only include Xerces and XML-APIs when compiling with JDK 5+ with a desired target of JDK 5+ and then having the unit tests that use validation only run when Java 5+ is enabled. However, this seems like a lot of work for
On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Phil Steitz
phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Henri Yandell wrote:
I was thinking more that a smaller [collections] might have room for
the functor code again - not that [lang] would :) Agreed that it's
better
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=265231projectId=171
Build statistics:
State: Ok
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 1 Jan 2010 17:35:09 -0800
Finished at: Fri 1 Jan 2010 17:39:23 -0800
Total time: 4m 14s
Build Trigger: Schedule
On 03/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 03/01/2010, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 01/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote:
sebb
sebb wrote:
On 03/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 03/01/2010, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 01/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote:
