Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A93C46D29 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 01:19:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24566 invoked by uid 500); 13 Jul 2011 01:19:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 24467 invoked by uid 500); 13 Jul 2011 01:19:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 24459 invoked by uid 99); 13 Jul 2011 01:19:47 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 01:19:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of paulus.benedictus@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.43] (HELO mail-vw0-f43.google.com) (209.85.212.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 01:19:40 +0000 Received: by vws10 with SMTP id 10so4717827vws.30 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oTprWC5E3PddjdT5JfFK45RzmM476NvRyUnvj1CeKQs=; b=VHfdqf8+D0CJvDtz7JX3UPJkBujU6rqxHbJxK6T7EKHdWHlmRs52xQDNjcXJ8U5C98 l7ZndPOWWjfVX8mUahdhg/zOS2NuLXrnKIUBaIcksYIgwcjo8WmnBQLQ5S7H3E34z+MA 0mi2cAXSLV3Jmjf+BIuc//Uq4bMHVt8loh2AA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.188.201 with SMTP id db9mr156887vcb.232.1310519959398; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Sender: paulus.benedictus@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.183.71 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:19:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 20:19:19 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: C1VXuX-Hp1TokbLakW3OXAOP2RY Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lang] RC4 heads up From: Paul Benedict To: Commons Developers List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org You sure it's not a bug in the JDK? Just asking. The results are curious. On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > On 12 July 2011 18:56, J=F6rg Schaible wrote: >> 1/ FastDateFormat >> The date format "yyyy yyy yy y" is formatted with JDK 7 as "2003 2003 03 >> 2003" instead of "2003 03 03 03". So, should FastDateFormat follow the J= DK >> in any case and adjust its result according the runtime? Interestingly >> Javadoc states already for Java 6: "For formatting, if the number of pat= tern >> letters is 2, the year is truncated to 2 digits; otherwise it is interpr= eted >> as a number." > > I think that since this release is not compatible with previous > releases, then [lang] should follow JDK 7 conventions only, with good > javadoc about what it does. > > Stephen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org