[VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

In line with Craig's note earlier tonight, and the semi-voting that is already going on under another subject, I thought I'd make it formal/binding. So: +1 if you agree that the Struts 1.3b3 release should be declared the initial release candidate for the 1.1 release, with an RC2 in early Februar

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

+1 Craig On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, James Turner wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:00:23 -0500 > From: James Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 R

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

+1 -- James Mitchell - Original Message - From: "James Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:00 PM Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 > In line with Craig's note earlier tonight, and the

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 +1 Craig On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, James Turner wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:00:23 -0500 > From: James Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

+1 From: "James Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:00:23 -0500 In line with Craig's note e

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

David Graham wrote: +1 Didn't David add the cdata/comments to the Javascript Tag that he and Martin were talking about on Thursday. It seemed that there was still disagreement that was a good thing ? Would those end up in the RC1 from the head of the CVS tree or are we voting on the STRUTS_

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:05:08 -0500 David Graham wrote: +1 Didn't David add the c

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "David" == David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> The only added attribute was "cdata" that defaults to true on the javascript David> tag. I'd like to see this included in the release because it rounds out the David> xhtml functionality. David> We have yet to hear

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "David" == David M Karr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "David" == David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> The only added attribute was "cdata" that defaults to true on the javascript David> tag. I'd like to see this included in the release because it rounds out the Da

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Is that a -1 for 1.1 or -1 for any release? Dave From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Karr) Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 Date: 18 Jan 2003 13:13:43 -0800 >>>&

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Given that there have been around 50 commits since 1.1-b3, and there are currently 21 Bugzilla issues outstanding, in all honesty, I would find it hard to claim that 1.1-b3 is really a release candidate. I would prefer to take what we have now, or in a (very) short time from now, and call that a r

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

On 18 Jan 2003, David M. Karr wrote: > > "David" == David M Karr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > "David" == David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David> The only added attribute was "cdata" that defaults to true on the >javascript > David> tag. I'd like to see this inclu

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "David" == David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> Is that a -1 for 1.1 or -1 for any release? David> Dave I very much want to see a 1.1 release very soon, I just don't think the release candidate should be the 1.1b3 release. >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Karr)

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "David" == David M Karr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> Is there an easy way to get the diffs or comments of all elements with commits David> since the 1.1b3 tagging? If it's useful, I figured out how to get the diffs listing, at least, with: cvs rdiff -rSTRUTS_1_1_B3 jakart

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

3 3:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 > > > >>>>> "David" == David M Karr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > David> Is there an easy way to get the diffs or comments > of all elements w

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Try out Ant's task - there is even an XSL file to turn this into a nice report built into the Ant 1.5+ distribution. Details: http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/manual/CoreTasks/cvstagdiff.html Erik On Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 03:01 AM, David M. Karr wrote: "David" == David M Karr <[EMAIL

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

It was my original understanding that Struts-el lived in the contrib folder, as Craig mentioned he would do with Struts-JSF. One advantage of this is that Struts-el (and Struts-JSF) could have their own release cycle. In general, I would to see us position Struts as a model and view agnostic Co

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Ted Husted wrote: Of course, since this is a majority vote situation, http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html these -1s will not prevent a release, unless other committers change their vote. (My chance to veto the idea unilaterally was when the build.xml was first changed, but that boat

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Regardless of what we do in this instance, could we clarify as a guideline 1) Whether Beta to Release candidate votes are on corresponding CVS tag. 2) Whether we want to go from the nightly build to a RC without an intervening beta. Whatever teams like Tomcat and Ant are doing would be fine wit

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 6:42 AM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 > I would suggest that struts-el be packaged as a separate > download from the Struts 1.1 core, o

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

James Turner wrote: I would suggest that struts-el be packaged as a separate download from the Struts 1.1 core, on the grounds that... I can take the alternate view, which is that because struts-el is in the contrib directory, it implicitly has lower standards for release quality that the core d

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "Ted" == Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ted> As it stands, struts-el has been documented as a contribution and does not Ted> appear with the other developer guides (mea culpa). Making it a standalone Ted> distribution is just a matter of changing the build script. This wo

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Martin Cooper wrote: > Given that there have been around 50 commits since 1.1-b3, and there > arecurrently 21 Bugzilla issues outstanding, in all honesty, I would > find it hard to claim that 1.1-b3 is really a release candidate. > > I would prefer to take what we have now, or in a (very) short tim

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Ted said (I just love that aliteration...): > My suggestion would be to schedule a Beta 4 against the > nightly build, > and then to not hesitate releasing B4 as Struts 1.1. final if > it flies. > The idea being we suspect that B4 is a "defacto" release > candidate, and > may go from B4 to Re

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Be that as it may, there is not a strict technical requirement that any of the Struts taglibs be bundled in the core JAR or that the releases coincide with the release of the Action and Config packages. Is the struts-el taglib now actually broken because html:link gained a missing property? Or

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Anyone still sitting on the fence at this point is probably going to sit there through the final release, or would poke around for weeks before looking at it. Personally, I say we fix the 8 issues, release B4, and if nothing critical comes up in a week or ten days, go to Struts 1.1 final. (Hey,

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1 > > So, I'd say lets cut to the chase. Do B4, and if it's good, > let's just >

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

> "Ted" == Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ted> Is the struts-el taglib now actually broken because html:link gained a missing Ted> property? Or does it simply fail to meet one of our expectations for the taglib? No, I certainly wouldn't call it "broken", just that it wouldn't

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Ted Husted wrote: > Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 06:42:26 -0500 > From: Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

On 19 Jan 2003, David M. Karr wrote: > I don't know enough about what exactly Struts-JSF will be doing to really > compare it, but I would guess that it won't be as intimately tied to the Struts > MVC core or to the Struts tag library, which would make it logical to be > released separately. >

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Craig R. McClanahan wrote: It's clearly not a good idea to formally label 1.1b3 as a release candidate if we're not in consensus. However, rather than continue discussing it, that energy would be better spent resolving the remaining bug reports :-). Which will hopefully be short work now that w

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

amp;type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&cmdtype=doit&newqueryname=&order=reuse+last+sort If that looks good, any of us could then suggest converting the beta 4 to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the latter.) -Ted. James Turner wrote: From: Ted Husted [mailto

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

gest converting the beta 4 to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the latter.) -Ted. James Turner wrote: From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

he final release. (And I would favor the > latter.) > > -Ted. > > James Turner wrote: > >>From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >>Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM > >>To: Struts Developers List > >>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

t looks good, any of us could then suggest converting the beta 4 > > to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the > > latter.) > > > > -Ted. > > > > James Turner wrote: > > > >>> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

Martin Cooper wrote: > Perhaps surprisingly, other than fixing the 8 bugs, there > really isn't that much difference. Renaming B3 to RC1 sounds > simple, but in practice, it requires a fair amount of work. > Make that 5 bugs... James -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: F

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

that looks good, any of us could then suggest converting the beta 4 to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the latter.) -Ted. James Turner wrote: From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re:

Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1

ype=allwordssubstr&keywords=&keywords_type=anywords&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&cmdtype=doit&newqueryname=&order=reuse+last+sort If that looks good, any of us could then suggest converting the beta 4 to a release candidate or even the final release. (A