Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 90720 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2004 10:24:15 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2004 10:24:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 87361 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2004 10:24:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 87223 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2004 10:24:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 87206 invoked by uid 99); 30 Aug 2004 10:24:08 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [192.18.33.10] (HELO exchange.sun.com) (192.18.33.10) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with SMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 03:24:08 -0700 Received: (qmail 4146 invoked by uid 50); 30 Aug 2004 10:25:49 -0000 Date: 30 Aug 2004 10:25:49 -0000 Message-ID: <20040830102549.4145.qmail@nagoya.betaversion.org> From: bugzilla@apache.org To: commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Cc: Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 30893] - [configuration] Misleading javadoc for Configuration.subset(String prefix) X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30893 [configuration] Misleading javadoc for Configuration.subset(String prefix) glissmann@protosoft.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID ------- Additional Comments From glissmann@protosoft.de 2004-08-30 10:25 ------- I was able to reproduce this problem today.. but only for the version of the .jar file we use in our project (1.0 dev-3). I found out just then, that this is not the current one. The problem described below does not appear with the current .jar file, they behave exactly as you describe they should. Sorry for the work I have caused, Joerg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org