Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jak-commons-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: dev@commons.apache.org
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsO2cmc=?= Schaible <joerg.schaible@scalaris.com>
Subject: Re: [VFS] Is it OK to upgrade commons-net to 2.2?
Followup-To: gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 10:44:25 +0100
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <ikqc9p$j0h$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <87r5anebom.fsf@v35516.1blu.de> <ikq3hp$84p$1@dough.gmane.org>
 <87pqq7w92e.fsf@v35516.1blu.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
User-Agent: KNode/4.4.9

Hi Stefan,

Stefan Bodewig wrote:

> On 2011-03-04, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> 
>> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> 
>>> the recent Gump failures occur because commons-net has removed a
>>> deprecated method that VFS uses.  The recommended replacement of the
>>> method is not available in commons-net 2.0 (which trunk depends on) so
>>> in order to adapt to the changes VFS would need to upgdare to
>>> commons-net 2.2.
> 
>>> Would such a change be acceptable?
> 
>> I suspect currently not (at least as long as net 2.2 is not yet
>> released),
> 
> <http://commons.apache.org/net/download_net.cgi> looks a lot as if 2.2
> was released, isn't it?

Right, I already forgot about it :-)

>> because Ralph started RCs for VFS, but searches currently the time to cut
>> the next one we can vote on.
> 
> Understood.

Actually the usage of net 2.2 would be better then, but Ralph should agree 
in the current vfs stage.

- Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org