Ate Douma wrote:
Thanks for looking into this Dennis!
I don't have time left before the weekend, but I can review and commit
your patch next Monday.
Concerning the column placement (0-based or 1-based) I have no idea
yet as Steve has refactored it so much I need to dive into it first.
Nevertheless, if you patch fixes at least the API breakage and we can
get the code to compile again I'll be happy to commit it :)
it does :)
Regards,
Ate
Dennis Dam wrote:
Hi,
I was looking at the broken testcase TestPortletPlacement, which
tests the recently (heavily) refactored PortletPlacementContextImpl.
The constructor of PortletPlacementContextImpl was changed, so I
added some JMock objects to account for this, see the attached patch.
*however*, the tests are still broken, and this is something I don't
know how to fix, because I don't know the specs are. The problem: the
mock test data has 1-based column numbering, but the
PortletPlacementContextImpl seems to need a 0-based column count (
see the method getColumnFromFragment() ). The result is that the
column with column nr. = column-count is reset to column-count - 1,
which results in all fragments from both column 1 and 2 ending up in
the same column.
What should the behaviour be, columns must be 0-based ? In that case
all the column nrs in FragmentUtil and TestPortletPlacemen must
decreased by 1.
regards,
Dennis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
