This is now committed to the trunk with rev. 1605029 

Jacopo

On Jun 23, 2014, at 5:20 PM, Jacopo Cappellato 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> sure, I will.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jacopo
> 
> On Jun 23, 2014, at 4:42 PM, Dékány Dániel <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> That&#39;s fine as far as I&#39;m concerned. (Update from GitHub and rebuild 
>> if that&#39;s not a problem.) Thanks,  Daniel Dekany
>> Jacopo Cappellato <[email protected]> írta:
>>> I can actually commit the new jar and the updated code to run it in the 
>>> trunk in order to simplify the tests from the community. WDYT?
>>> 
>>> Jacopo
>>> 
>>> On Jun 23, 2014, at 2:18 PM, Dékány Dániel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> It would be good if testing the new version goes beyond that single test 
>>>> case, however. Alhough the reworked method overloading support has good 
>>>> test coverage, this was a quite complex change (it doesn&#39;t just fix 
>>>> the null issue, but many others, like rounding issues). Not to mention 
>>>> that turing on the new overloaded method handling is inherently not 100% 
>>>> backward compatible (that&#39;s why it&#39;s by default off). Although its 
>>>> much less prone to fail with errors, there&#39;s still a little chance 
>>>> that you need to addjust some OfBiz code. Thanks,  Daniel Dekany 
>>>> Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> írta:
>>>>> Good news, thanks Jacopo!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>> 
>>>>> Le 23/06/2014 12:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>> FYI:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have been working with Daniel on this and he has helped a lot and I 
>>>>>> have now a working environment; as soon as the new version will be 
>>>>>> published I will update the OFBiz code accordingly.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jun 18, 2014, at 11:11 AM, Jacopo Cappellato 
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I did the tests but unfortunately they were still not successful.
>>>>>>> I have posted a comment to the ticket: let&#39;s see what Daniel has to 
>>>>>>> say.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jun 17, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Jacques Le Roux 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We need to address this 
>>>>>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/freemarker/bugs/363/?page=2
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>> PS: @Adam, I put you to be sure you will get a chance to read ;)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>> 
> 

Reply via email to