David H. DeWolf ha scritto:
BTW, I think what we though tiles:attribute would be, is actually
tiles:put and tiles:putList. You'd think that I'd remember that.
I'd propose we:
1) rename tiles:attribute to tiles:insertAttribute
2) rename tiles:put to tiles:putAttribute
Hey hey wait I minute!
Antonio Petrelli ha scritto:
Hey hey wait I minute!
Too late :-) Hey Joe, why did you commit your ideas without asking the
author (i.e. me) about the names of those tags?
There was a discussion some time ago on Shale users list about naming
confusion (someone used attributes in non-layout
Greg Reddin ha scritto:
On 1/11/07, David H. DeWolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
have you tried:
tiles:attribute name=head
Wow, I thought (from looking at the FAQ) that this defined a *new*
attribute, not inserted one already defined.
The insert and define verbs are both corrects because
David H. DeWolf ha scritto:
2) rename tiles:put to tiles:putAttribute
I don't know, if you rename tiles:put you should rename also the put
element in the Tiles configuration file, they should be the same.
Antonio
-
To
Ted,
I assume that JayRock is an optional add-on, and not built into Overdrive,
given that it's LGPL licensed?
--
Martin Cooper
On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: husted
Date: Fri Jan 12 07:19:29 2007
New Revision: 495597
URL:
Sorry, I suppose that was kind of hasty of me. But I have to say that I
totally disagree that the behavior of the tiles:attribute tag as it is
written is defining anything. It is causing content to appear in the page,
and therefore should have a name like insertXXX
I think there was some kind
Joe Germuska wrote:
Sorry, I suppose that was kind of hasty of me.
I urged you to do it too. . .the great thing about source control is
that we can always roll back :)
But I have to say that I
totally disagree that the behavior of the tiles:attribute tag as it is
written is defining
On 1/12/07, Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think we should have more discussion before reverting anything, because
I
feel pretty strongly about naming, and I feel like what is there now is
substantially more clear than what was there before.
+1. Let's get on the same page before
Yes, I didn't upload the binaries for that reason.
-T.
On 1/12/07, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted,
I assume that JayRock is an optional add-on, and not built into Overdrive,
given that it's LGPL licensed?
--
Martin Cooper
On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey, I just sent this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and when I went to build a new
snapshot of struts-annotations, I got a permission denied
Turns out the existing file is owned by mrdon:apcvs with 644 perms.
I think we need to make sure everyone who does deployments adds permissions
configs to their
Fixed.
Don
Joe Germuska wrote:
Hey, I just sent this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and when I went to build a new
snapshot of struts-annotations, I got a permission denied
Turns out the existing file is owned by mrdon:apcvs with 644 perms.
I think we need to make sure everyone who does deployments
Great -- and I just verified that I am able to deploy, which I did, for
struts-annotations.
That leads me to a couple of small practice questions for the team.
First, I really like having source code in the maven repository, so that mvn
eclipse:eclipse -DdownloadSources=true can get them all
12 matches
Mail list logo
