Maybe turn on soft permutations in a sample app, since we do at least test those manually before a release.
Long-term, I'd like to see us using soft permutations by default, perhaps to collapse some browser permutations. If it were more commonly used then we'd likely notice that it's broken pretty quickly. - Brian On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Stephen Haberman <step...@exigencecorp.com>wrote: > > > Yes it sounds like a bug. Want to add that to the issue tracker? > > https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=8575 > > I've verified that the patch fixes the behavior in our application. > > Any good suggestions about how to test this? Or volunteers to review > the patch? > > Given it was, I assume, a bug in permutations.js, I imagine I would > have to create a mini test app with collapse-all-properties, have it > compile to JS, and then somehow verify that the right deferred binding > for permutation 0 (which ever browser that happened to be) got the > right selection. > > Thanks, > Stephen > > -- > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "GWT Contributors" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
