Thanks, David
The patch came w/ a mod to the example which demonstrates it working, and after the patch all existing tests passed (there have been several modifications to the Validator tree in Jakarta CVS since the patch, I haven't syched and run the tests again -- I cannot for the life of me imagine it breaking anything, but I believe there's this expression "famous last words..."). I can try to find time to code a JUnit test, but we're pretty jammed up for time on the project I'm on.
Thanks for the response, BTW.
Dave
"David Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 06/05/2003 10:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: Validator patch
You should send notes like this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
project name in the subject line (ie. [validator]). I did look at this when you submitted and think it's a good idea. What I'd really like to see is a JUnit test case (or just another test method on an existing test case) that proves this works. Once there's a test case for it, I'll commit it ASAP.
Thanks for the patches/ideas, David
>Hi Dave. > >I sent the following note to David Winterfeldt and Craig McClanahan >already (they are listed as the project maintainers), but I haven't had >any comment or response, so I just thought I'd forward it on to you. I >know you guys are busy trying to get various releases out. If you get a >chance, I'd like your feedback. > > >Hi, > >There's pressure on me from management to get as many of my local changes >to OSS projects folded back into the main tree so that our project will >remain compatible w/ future releases of those projects. > >I submitted the following bug/patch on 5/27 : >http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20267. > >It's pretty trivial, but it hasn't been assigned or even commented on. I >know there's a lot of refactoring of Validator going on right now, that >you're pushing for a 1.1 release soon, and that it has only been a week >since I submitted the patch. > >However, I just thought I'd give a gentle prod to ask if the patch could >at least be reviewed and commented on, and if possible either a) applied >or b) given an estimate of when it might be accepted or if it won't, why. >I know that struts depends on Validator, but I believe my changes preserve >source and binary backward compatibility. > >Thanks, >Dave
_________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
