Ryan Bloom wrote:
I am trying to get xmlrpc building, and I am running into problems with
commons-codec 1.2.
Basically, the problem is in calling Base64.encode and .decode.
Essentially, the code 1.1 release had two encode and decode methods, one
that accepted a byte[] and the other accepted an
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Adam Jack wrote:
>
> >
> > I am trying to get xmlrpc building, and I am running into problems with
> > commons-codec 1.2.
>
> Yup, Gump found these a few weeks ago. Basically the view from this
> list/community (of which I am just an observer, not a participant) is -- use
>
Nevermind, Jochen already posted one.
Ryan
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> OK, I'll post the patch today.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
> > On Di, 2004-06-15 at 19:01, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > > So, I have one option (which kind of sucks), I can cas
OK, I'll post the patch today.
Ryan
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Di, 2004-06-15 at 19:01, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> > So, I have one option (which kind of sucks), I can cast the byte[] to an
> > Object in the calls to encode/decode to retain compatibility between codec
> > 1.
On Di, 2004-06-15 at 19:01, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> So, I have one option (which kind of sucks), I can cast the byte[] to an
> Object in the calls to encode/decode to retain compatibility between codec
> 1.1 and 1.2.
Let it suck. :-) If you do that change, it will prevent a lot of hazzle
and questi
>
> I am trying to get xmlrpc building, and I am running into problems with
> commons-codec 1.2.
Yup, Gump found these a few weeks ago. Basically the view from this
list/community (of which I am just an observer, not a participant) is -- use
codec 1.1, don't move up. Is that option not available
