Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/16/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any new input on #37730? If we are not ready to resolve the serialization issue, then we should table this new feature for a subsequent release. Done in r369764, see comments on Bug# 37730. I resolved the CGLIB-related bugs and updated the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Ted Husted
OK, I see by the commit and wiki logs that Wendy has done the deed, and everything is checked that going to be checked :) * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsClassicRelease130 Since a multiproject relesae is still new ground, I'm thinking the next step would be to assembly a prototype of what

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Laurie Harper
I hate to say it, but I'm not going to have time to work on fixing this in time for the 1.3 release. Wendy's suggestion (removing the feature for now) probably makes the most sense; I'll look at adding the serialization support and putting the enhanced form bean support into 'extras' post

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Ted Husted
25267 (Cactus test) is still open but will be dealt with later. Yes, I'm thinking that it's the tests that are broken, rather than the code. Having the cactus tests would be better, but it's better to release without than not release. We have been testing the code through the unit tests and

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/17/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, I see by the commit and wiki logs that Wendy has done the deed, and everything is checked that going to be checked :) The release notes could use a final review; I didn't check it off on the release plan. And we also need to remove the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Martin Cooper
On 1/17/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, I see by the commit and wiki logs that Wendy has done the deed, and everything is checked that going to be checked :) * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsClassicRelease130 Since a multiproject relesae is still new ground, I'm thinking

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Ted Husted
I reviewed the notes in November, and I'll go over the commit logs since, to see if there is anything else we need to mention. But they should already be very close. One question would be whether we should copy the release notes page to each of the subproject and then edit them down to contain

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-17 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/17/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And we also need to remove the example of the cglib enhanced form from apps/examples. Done in r370014. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-16 Thread Ted Husted
Any new input on #37730? If we are not ready to resolve the serialization issue, then we should table this new feature for a subsequent release. -Ted. On 1/13/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bug# 37301 looks like an enhancement request to me... I don't think it should prevent a

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-13 Thread Ted Husted
OK then, looking at Wendy's latest update to the status page, * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsClassicRelease130 with the Commons Resources dependency on the backburner, now we are down to the codependant issues regarding the new EDAF component * Enhanced DynaActionForms cannot be correct

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-13 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/13/06, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That CGLib extension always bugged me a bit... might that not be a perfect candidate for the Extras package, which would serve to resolve issue #2 as well? The idea of that dependency, even if optional (it *is* optional, right?!?) doesn't

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-13 Thread Frank W. Zammetti
Wendy Smoak wrote: The CGLib enhancement is already completely optional-- you do not have to include cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar in your webapp. It works if you include the jar and use the new 'enhanced' attribute in struts-config. That's what I thought, just wanted to be sure. Frank

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-12 Thread Ted Husted
On 1/11/06, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the point is that we can't move Resources to Extras if the core is going to depend on it. We might be talking past each other. The package I'm talking about is here: * http://struts.apache.org/struts-extras/apidocs/index.html

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-12 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/12/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We might be talking past each other. The package I'm talking about is here: * http://struts.apache.org/struts-extras/apidocs/index.html org.apache.struts.plugins.resources AFAIK, this is the only package with a dependency on Commons

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-11 Thread James Mitchell
I'm not sure where this ended up. Whether Resources is part of the jar in extras or not, I don't think we should have a dependency on any called extras. extra (to me) means optional. Am I wrong on this? -- James Mitchell EdgeTech, Inc. http://edgetechservices.net/ 678.910.8017 Skype:

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-11 Thread Martin Cooper
On 1/11/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/11/06, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure where this ended up. Whether Resources is part of the jar in extras or not, I don't think we should have a dependency on any called extras. extra (to me) means optional. Am

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-11 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/4/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Regardless, I'm thinking that we should rename the acquiring.xml to downloads.xml, since that's the usual name, and the one I should have used in the first place. Done, so Maven will stop saying we haven't had any releases. The old acquiring

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-10 Thread James Mitchell
Actually, what we call 'extras' was originally 'plugins'. I created that area to host optional plugins that shouldn't be depended on by anything. While I had bigger plans for 'plugins', only resources seemed to make it there. I didn't want to put resources under the sandbox, because each

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-10 Thread Christian Meder
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 06:48 -0500, Ted Husted wrote: Given the various API changes that are being discussed for CommonsResources, * http://tinyurl.com/8llr6 we might not want to hold the rest of 1.3.0 until Resources is released. Agreed. IMO Resources doesn't feel like 1.0 material yet and

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-10 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/10/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As and for an alternative, I suggest we move the classes that depend on Resources from Extras * http://struts.apache.org/struts-extras/apidocs/index.html to a sandbox Extras folder until Commons Message Resources is ready. The original vote

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-04 Thread Ted Husted
On 1/3/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/3/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right now, we have blank running, but that's it. /svn/struts/current/build $ maven nightly was failing when it tried to copy struts-mailreader.war from /apps/shared/target. I changed that to

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-04 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 1/4/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Regardless, I'm thinking that we should rename the acquiring.xml to downloads.xml, since that's the usual name, and the one I should have used in the first place. Sounds fine to me. (I think I was the last person to publish struts-site; I'll

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-04 Thread Niall Pemberton
Done. Niall - Original Message - From: Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:09 PM Also for 1.3 -- Niall (or another Resources committer) can you please put commons-resources-1.0.0-RC1 in the internal repo so we can change the Struts Extras build to depend

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2006-01-03 Thread Ted Husted
So, what do we need to do to get the nightly builds running for the other Apps? Right now, we have blank running, but that's it. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-12-21 Thread Ted Husted
On 12/20/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The result of 'maven multiproject:site', zipped up, is 17.5 MB. I still can't get that goal to run, so I've been building the ones I work on individually. -- E:\projects\Apache\struts\flow\src\java\org\apache\struts\flow\core\javascript\f

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-12-20 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 12/12/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we think the problem is the tests, rather than the code, then I don't believe that the issue should affect whether we release. That's what I think. I've had 1.3.0-dev in production since mid-September and the app uses most of the Struts-EL

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-12-12 Thread Ted Husted
If we think the problem is the tests, rather than the code, then I don't believe that the issue should affect whether we release. I might try to setup some webtests for the Taglib Exercises and Cookbook, so that we still have automated tests for the tags. I'm still twiddling with the MailReader

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-12-07 Thread Ted Husted
On 12/6/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The release plan shows including struts-site.jar. There is no source code in 'site,' so that jar only contains a manifest. Ted, were you thinking of including the generated website in the release? Yes, the citation to the JAR was just a copy

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-12-06 Thread Wendy Smoak
Coming back around to the pending 1.3 release... It looks like Commons Resources is coming along well, thanks to Niall, Rahul and Christian. Laurie, can we please have an update on Bug 37730 and the Enhanced DynaActionForm addition in general? 37301 is also still open. Thanks! The Cactus

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Ted Husted
I've been through Apps, and it's looking quite good now. There were only very minor fixes to the pages, everything seems to be working well. Many thanks to Wendy and James and everyone who's been working on the Maven builds. It's all come together very nicely. IMHO, the process is more

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Niall Pemberton
- Original Message - From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 1:27 PM snip Release caveats are that we have two dependencies on non-GA code: Commons Validator and Commons Resources. Commons Resources is being used as part of the Extras subproject. All I did

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread James Mitchell
Let's not forget about the updates needed to support all of our uses of svn:exterals. Whenever we branch or tag (it is really just a copy), we'll need to fix any svn:externals to point to the tagged/ branched versions since this is not automatically done for us. I just updated this page:

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Ted Husted
Is it even useful to tag a SVN repository for a release? If we document the revision as of the release, then we can always go back and branch on that revision later, or retrieve a snapshot of the repository as of the release. -Ted. On 11/15/05, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's not

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Ted Husted
On 11/15/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Validator 1.2.0 has only received 2 +1 votes so far - and so needs at least one more before I can cut a release. Don Brown did alot of the Validator 1.2.0 work and I am expecting he will vote (hopefully +1), but hes away on vacation at the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Martin Cooper
On 11/15/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it even useful to tag a SVN repository for a release? Yes, I believe it is. That way, it's more explicit, you can see the tags under struts/tags in the repo, and you don't have to dig up the repo revision number. It's also cheap - nothing

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Niall Pemberton
Thanks Ted :-) From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 11/15/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Validator 1.2.0 has only received 2 +1 votes so far - and so needs at least one more before I can cut a release. Don Brown did alot of the Validator 1.2.0 work and I am expecting he will

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 11/15/05, Niall Pemberton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only problem with these notes (and some Ted added on that page) is that they're unix specific and don't mean alot to me. Cygwin! I use TortoiseSVN, too, but sometimes it's easier to do things at the command line. I don't think anyone

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread James Mitchell
That would be a problem too because we would need a StrutsMaintenanceSvnCygwin, StrutsMainenanceSvnLinux. The notes I added are more of a guideline than a recipe. -- James Mitchell 678.910.8017 Skpe: jmitchtx On Nov 15, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: The only problem with these

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 11/15/05, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be a problem too because we would need a StrutsMaintenanceSvnCygwin, StrutsMainenanceSvnLinux. You forgot Solaris. ;) I haven't found a problem using the command-line instructions on Cygwin, so I doubt we'd need separate

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-11-15 Thread Wendy Smoak
On 11/15/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been through Apps, and it's looking quite good now. There were only very minor fixes to the pages, everything seems to be working well. I have a few changes (Validator Plugin config to use the copy of validator-rules in the struts-core

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-27 Thread Ted Husted
I'm not having any luck getting started with the Apps subproject, so I think I should go back to reviewing the rest of the documentation for now. I think the only major thing keeping us from rolling 1.3.0 is that the source for the MailReader seems disjointed. It looks like part is under shared

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-27 Thread James Mitchell
I'll take a look at it. The initial plan for 'shared' was to prevent a bunch of duplicate 'one-off' mailreaders from getting out of sync, but no-one has attempted doing a single 'one-off', so I assume it is safe to put it back the way we originally had it (structure). Thanks. -- James

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-27 Thread Don Brown
Sure, go ahead. Thanks, Don Niall Pemberton wrote: On 10/27/05, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. The only sticking point is the Validator release doesn't build for me with Java 1.3, and I haven't had time to look into why, but other than that, it is good to go for an RC release.

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-06 Thread Ted Husted
There is still more to do with the Core documention for Building Components and Configuration Applications sections. We tweaked the product names, but I don't know that the background text is still in synch with the new distribution paradigm. I do know that the Request Processor section still

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-05 Thread Ted Husted
Thanks, Wendy. I've had to spend some of my volunteer hours elsewhere lately, but things should be getting back on track for me now. I'm planning to work on the Applications/MailReader project next, and then get back to the Core documentation. We've always had troubles with the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-05 Thread Christian Meder
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 07:50 -0400, Ted Husted wrote: Thanks, Wendy. I've had to spend some of my volunteer hours elsewhere lately, but things should be getting back on track for me now. I'm planning to work on the Applications/MailReader project next, and then get back to the Core

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-10-03 Thread Wendy Smoak
The usual Monday update. :) The tiles-documentation webapp now builds and (mostly) works, but it's not included in the overall 'build-all' goal. Right now it lives in tiles/tiles-documentation, and I don't immediately see how to get Maven to build it as part of Tiles. There's a similar

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-25 Thread Wendy Smoak
A couple of issues from this weekend: I was able to run the Cactus tests for Struts EL under Maven, but there are failures. Can someone more familiar with it please take a look? (The instructions are the same as for Taglib, see the README file.) The tiles-documentation.war doesn't work

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-20 Thread Ted Husted
The documentation refactorings are going well, but I'd like to set that aside for now and hop over to the Applications subproject, which is mentioned from time to time on the other docs. If anyone wants to jump in on the docs, please feel free. There's enough done now to set the direction for the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Ted Husted
Right now, I'm in the middle of a documentation review. I'm through Site, and the first part of Core. It's going well. I'm trying to make sure that the way we explain everything is consistent with the subproject approach. I'll continue to work on it day-by-day (unless there's a Falcon's game on!).

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Joe Germuska
At 7:46 AM -0400 9/13/05, Ted Husted wrote: Right now, I'm in the middle of a documentation review. I'm through Site, and the first part of Core. It's going well. I'm trying to make sure that the way we explain everything is consistent with the subproject approach. I'll continue to work on it

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Craig McClanahan
On 9/13/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right now, I'm in the middle of a documentation review. I'm through Site, and the first part of Core. It's going well. I'm trying to make sure that the way we explain everything is consistent with the subproject approach. I'll continue to work

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Wendy Smoak
Ted wrote: One question is where do we stand on stand-alone Tiles? Are we comfortable with bringing that up and making it part of Classic 1.3.0, or do we want to let things perculate a bit first. Standalone Tiles needs... - tiles-core.tld updated to JSP 1.2 with embedded HTML docs - some sort

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread James Mitchell
I'm not 100% sure of this myself yet, but it may be a good idea at this time to pull out the Tiles dependencies from core and provide them via a separate plugin (see struts/current/plugins). While this does add another jar to our applications, it would allow a developer to use either

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread James Mitchell
Providing a migration path (wiki page) fueled by a JDiff report (http://javadiff.sourceforge.net/) should be pretty easy as well. (http://maven.apache.org/reference/plugins/jdiff/) -- James Mitchell Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance EdgeTech,

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread James Mitchell
There is some Tiles documentation intermixed in the normal xdocs, which should be moved to the appropriate location. I'm looking into why tiles if failing right now. I'll post back in a few. -- James Mitchell Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Ted Husted
That seems like a reasonable bridge, James. A driving force behind plugins, and the new request processor, is being able to extend the core framework for extensions as radical as Tiles. It seems appropriate that we keep Tiles at arms-length, to show that something like this can be plugged in

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread James Mitchell
I found out what's happening. When you run Maven, if some goal needs to build documentation or 'site' and there is no 'xdocs' dir, Maven adds one. sarcastic Gee, thanks. /sarcastic So, since Wendy has volunteered her time (btw...thanks!) to fix our documentation, some of the subprojects

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] When you run Maven, if some goal needs to build documentation or 'site' and there is no 'xdocs' dir, Maven adds one. sarcastic Gee, thanks. /sarcastic I noticed that... it happened in Shale and I added a postGoal to clean to delete the empty xdocs

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-13 Thread James Mitchell
I'm taking a rather drastic step here. Rather than futs around with Maven to make it behave, I've changed the nightly build process to checkout a whole new copy of what's in svn so we can avoid this (and future) issues related to lingering files. Currently the build happens at 2:00 AM

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-02 Thread Wendy Smoak
Ted Husted wrote: $ maven multiproject:site from site/build is not. It fails with Typo? It should be /current/site (not /current/site/build). BUILD FAILED Unable to obtain goal [site] -- C:\Documents and Settings\ted_2\.maven\cache\mav en-test-plugin-1.6.2\plugin.jelly:181:54: fail There

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-09-02 Thread Ted Husted
On 9/2/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you tell what subproject is doing it? (And did it just start happening?) Tiles. It wasn't happening earlier this week. You can run with -Dmaven.test.skip (or possibly -Dmaven.test.failure.ignore) to temporarily get around that. Yep,

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-27 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/23/05, Hubert Rabago [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Deprecations are done, unless anyone finds something I missed. If you still have that list you mentioned, Hubert, you can post it here: * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsUpgradeNotes12to13 -Ted/

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-27 Thread Hubert Rabago
On 8/27/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you still have that list you mentioned, Hubert, you can post it here: * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsUpgradeNotes12to13 Done. /h - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-24 Thread Ted Husted
Thanks, Wendy, increasing the memory setting did the trick. It just finished building, and everything looks as expected. I can get cracking on the fnal round of website changes now, and then we can take a deep breath and roll this beast :) -Ted. On 8/23/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-24 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Wendy, increasing the memory setting did the trick. It just finished building, and everything looks as expected. I can get cracking on the fnal round of website changes now, and then we can take a deep breath and roll this beast :) I'm not sure if

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-24 Thread Craig McClanahan
On 8/24/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Wendy, increasing the memory setting did the trick. It just finished building, and everything looks as expected. I can get cracking on the fnal round of website changes now, and then we can take

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-23 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone else try to build the site and let me know if it looks okay? My first try at building everything ran out of memory. I rebooted, and it's running again now. In the meantime, I'm starting a review of the documentation now, both as a

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-23 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/23/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone else try to build the site and let me know if it looks okay? I tried building the whole enchalida on another machine with Maven 1.0.2 and JDK 1.4.2.9, and ran into the same out of

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-23 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to call the website good enough for 1.3.0. The build looks great. I would like to make a few structural changes for 1.3.0, to help clarify that there is an Apache Struts Project which creates and maintains a set of related products

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-23 Thread Hubert Rabago
On 8/23/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I should be able to wrap up the distribution issues while Hubert wraps up the deprecations, and I would expect we'd have something rolled and ready for review by the end of the month -- just in time for Labor Day weekend in the US. :)

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-23 Thread Martin Cooper
On 8/23/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been checking the external links and notice that www.waferproject.org seems to be down. Does anyone know if Wafer is defunct, or just having server issues? Don't know. DNS doesn't seem to know about it any more, but the registration is still

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Wendy Smoak
I'm going to call the website good enough for 1.3.0. There's still some work to be done in site/xdocs/userGuide and the links embedded in the new tlds, but I don't think it's worth holding up the release. Can someone else try to build the site and let me know if it looks okay? I still have

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread James Mitchell
I'm looking at it now. I'll post back in a few. -- James Mitchell Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance EdgeTech, Inc. http://www.edgetechservices.net/ 678.910.8017 AIM: jmitchtx Yahoo: jmitchtx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: jmitchtx On Aug 22,

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to call the website good enough for 1.3.0. There's still some work to be done in site/xdocs/userGuide and the links embedded in the new tlds, but I don't think it's worth holding up the release. Thanks, Wendy. It sounds like the ball

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Hubert Rabago
I don't have the list of deprecated items removed with me now, and in any case, the list I was keeping needs to be reformatted anyway, so I'll work on that this week. I think we're gonna wanna share this list, right? :) I don't remember having a release notes document for 1.3.0, though. Are

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Hubert Rabago [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't remember having a release notes document for 1.3.0, though. Are you going to set one up? :) It's there already: site/xdocs/userGuide/release-notes.xml The content just needs to be changed to reflect 1.3.0 and link to the release-notes-1.2.7.html

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I remember looking at it, but I don't know how you're getting the results of a Bugzilla search into an html table. (For the release notes or for the Wiki. Anyone want to share the secret?) We generally rely on the commit logs rather than the

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Hubert Rabago
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Hubert Rabago [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't remember having a release notes document for 1.3.0, though. Are you going to set one up? :) It's there already: site/xdocs/userGuide/release-notes.xml Oh, you mean that one! Well, with 1.2.7

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Hubert Rabago [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's there already: site/xdocs/userGuide/release-notes.xml Oh, you mean that one! Well, with 1.2.7 I remember putting changes on the release notes after the change was made. At least during the latter part. Not sure how it gets started for a

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] We generally rely on the commit logs rather than the Bugzilla comments, which tend to be longwinded. I'm mixing up two different things... are you also doing the outstanding bugs on the Wiki by hand, then?

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/22/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] We generally rely on the commit logs rather than the Bugzilla comments, which tend to be longwinded. I'm mixing up two different things... are you also doing the outstanding bugs on the Wiki by hand,

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-22 Thread Wendy Smoak
I restored the release-notes.xml file, cleared the 1.2.7 information and got it ready for someone else to add the changes for 1.3.0-dev. :) This thread might help: http://www.mail-archive.com/user%40struts.apache.org/msg30423.html -- Wendy Smoak

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-18 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] That sounds great, Wendy. Thanks! The taglib doc is done, but I haven't had a chance to test the new tlds and make sure they actually work-- the taglib plugin claims it's validating them, but I'm not so sure. :) Here's what the JSP 1.2 tlds look like so

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-18 Thread Joe Germuska
If you have time, please review the tlds and click around the taglib documentation. Let me know if anything appears to be wrong or missing. I'll compare my taglib doc with Joe's version as well. I just updated the taglib subproject from SVN and don't see standalone TLD files, and the maven

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-18 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just updated the taglib subproject from SVN and don't see standalone TLD files, and the maven goal for generating them is still in place -- where did you put the new TLDs? Shouldn't the canonical TLD files be under the SVN repository for whichever project

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-17 Thread Wendy Smoak
I'm close to having JSP 1.2 tlds that retain all the html markup from the info sections of the source xml documents. I got stuck on combining the summary, info, and since tags into a single description section, and had to stop and ask for help with the xsl stylesheet. (Thanks, Greg!) If

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-17 Thread Ted Husted
That sounds great, Wendy. Thanks! On 8/17/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm close to having JSP 1.2 tlds that retain all the html markup from the info sections of the source xml documents. I got stuck on combining the summary, info, and since tags into a single description

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-17 Thread Dakota Jack
Your assertion in bugzilla that Ted invented stripping .x in 2002 is incorrect. If you think he invented that in 2002 you need to document it. The use of getX() and getY() is another matter entirely. On 8/1/05, Michael Jouravlev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/1/05, Hubert Rabago [EMAIL

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-17 Thread Dakota Jack
Here is Ted's 2002 offering: you will see that this has nothing to do with stripping .x. I think, further, that what Ted is talking about originated with Hubert Rabago, although I am not suggesting that Ted is suggesting otherwise. Anyway, this is all irrelevnat. On 7/31/05, Michael Jouravlev

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-17 Thread Dakota Jack
Ooops! Forgot the stuff. Here you go. An endless source of aggravation is the HTML input image element. The specification says that browsers should treat this control like an image map. Unlike other buttons, it does not submit a string representing the button's label, it submits the X and Y

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-16 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ted has this correct. In fact, the UserGuide HTML pages are generated using the base xdoc transformation, and then the TLDs are generated with goal name=struts:generate-tlds (in taglib/maven.xml) Thanks! That's what I needed. :) Especially with the new

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-16 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/16/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you have to do any cleanup on the generated tlds? Nope. -T. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-15 Thread Ted Husted
How are we doing on mavenizing the web site and removing the deprecations? When these two items are stable, I'll apply the remaining patches and try rolling a distribution. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-15 Thread Hubert Rabago
For deprecations, it's a good news/bad news thing. Core deprecations are done. There is one item that is left because I wasn't sure if now is the right time to remove it. The method is DynaActionFormClass.clear(). From what I can find, this was deprecated 14 months ago. It's easy to take out

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-15 Thread Wendy Smoak
From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] How are we doing on mavenizing the web site I'll get the internal links/anchors done this week. At least it should be good enough for 1.3.0, though I'm not sure how we intend to distribute the documentation this time around. The users don't really need

Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps

2005-08-15 Thread Joe Germuska
At 2:01 PM -0400 8/15/05, Ted Husted wrote: On 8/15/05, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where are the source files, and how were both the HTML files and the TLDs getting generated originally? If someone explains how it used to work, I can probably make it work again. Under the

Re: Struts Classic 1.3.0 Critter Corral (was Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps)

2005-08-12 Thread Ted Husted
If no one has any suggestions as to why any tag attributes should be marked RE false, I'll make this change (and the others) before running through the shake-down tests on Monday. (If we have the website and deprecations squared away by then.) My many thanks to everyone who is making the 1.3.x

Struts Classic 1.3.0 Critter Corral (was Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps)

2005-08-08 Thread Ted Husted
Note that the Clssic 1.3.0 release plan wiki page has been renamed: * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsClassicRelease130 Some issues have been pushed forward to a 1.3.1 plan. * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsClassicRelease131 Here's a roundup of the remaining issues with issues on the

Re: Struts Classic 1.3.0 Critter Corral (was Re: 1.3.0 Release - Next Steps)

2005-08-08 Thread Hubert Rabago
On 8/8/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Remove deprecations prior to 1.3.0 release * http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35953 Hubert, will you still be able to handle this? (Pretty please ..) I have most of these done. AFAIK, the only item I haven't removed yet

  1   2   >