Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
Don, >> Then, once the release is out, people nitpick through it finding >> issues to shoot it down (and yes, a beta is as good as a killed >> release because it doesn't get out to the users in an public, >> accessible location). I must be one of the folk guilty of nit-picking :) But honestly, I thought I found some legtimate issues, but that's only because the release managers asked people to find issues with it. I mean, the nit-picking has to be after a release because who wants to test something that's constantly in-flux? There needs to be a pretty stable baseline, and that's what I believe the release is for. So many changes go in and out of SVN, it's difficult to tell when things are published or not (like the site) in a distribution. But as for the problem with 1.3.4, it is "bigger" than Struts itself: it's an infrastructure issue, so I am told. Therefore, let's call this an exception. -- Paul --- Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Craig McClanahan wrote: > > However, I would be unhappy with > > all of us other committers if we stopped testing 1.3.4 at all, until > > 1.3.5became available, and we surface yet another two line change next > > week. > This is exactly why I think this release process, or least least the > Struts PMC implementation of it, is broken. A few Struts committers > work their butts off to push out a release, clearing all known issues > and repeatedly asking for help but getting none. Then, once the release > is out, people nitpick through it finding issues to shoot it down (and > yes, a beta is as good as a killed release because it doesn't get out to > the users in an public, accessible location). Ok, we go back, fix the > issues, and roll another release, only to have the same process happen > again and again. > > Honestly, this is very discouraging and kills any momentum we get. > Personally, I give up. I previously believed Struts moved so slowly > because of a lack of effort, but I'm wondering if the problem isn't more > profound. If, in six months with 100% dedicated committers willing to > do whatever it takes and a codebase that is stable and proven, we can't > push out a GA release, we have a serious problem. > > Don > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
I've trudged through the pages that were linked to the "home" page. I'm now wrapping up the remaining xx pages that were not linked in anywhere. Most of these cover the various Interceptor and Result Types. A lot of the pages utilize the snippet macro, and so the next step would be to review the Javadoc, and update the snippet references. Next week, I need to update parts of the MailReader training course for an upcoming engagement. But, I will time to wrap up the other documentation in June. Meanwhile, our evaluation license on Don's server is a week away from expiring. I think we will have a ASF box to run Confluence eventually, but it's not going to happen this week. The best thing might be to transfer the space to a server that is being shared by other ASF projects right now. The box was donated by Atlassian and is maintained by Contegrix. * http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/ The glitch is that our space is too large to be exported in one fell swoop. It may be a RAM issue. I'd like to try restoring one of the nightly backups from the twdata site to a local machine, to see if we have any better luck here. Otherwise, we'll have to see if Atlassian/Contegrix will give us our own space on the OSS box, or just get a complimentary license from Atlassian that we can use on Don's box now, and then on an ASF box later. Meanwhile, it's worth noting that the wiki content is not "protected" until we post it to a ASF box. In this context, protected means that the material has been duly donated to the ASF, and tht the ASF accepts ownership of the material. In the unlikely event of an intellectual property lawsuit, the ASF would defend "protected" material, but *not* material posted elsewhere. The other benefit of "protected" content is that there is no doubt about who owns what: the ASF, a non-profit US corporation, owns all the protected material. Pretty soon, we should be able to start exporting and posting the wiki material to the website, at which point that material would become protected. But, until then, we're still on our own. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
On 5/14/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/ I thought this would default to the dashboard, but it doesn't. Insted, try * http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/dashboard.action -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
On 5/14/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If, in six months with 100% dedicated committers willing to do whatever it takes and a codebase that is stable and proven, we can't push out a GA release, we have a serious problem. First, six months of effort would be a record. Typically, the process has taken 18 to 24 months. Whether the process is fast or slow, the process has been successful. We all have a lot of very stable applications in production. What grassroots engineers say over and over again is that Struts Action 1 works just fine for them, and what we all want most in SAF1 is more stable, problem-free releases. Second, the 1.3.4 build is broken. Leaving the DTD unregistered could cause problems for any developer without a live internet connection. It will also put undue stress on intranets, and even on our own infrastructure. It's a technical error that should be corrected. Third, I'm not a fan of this notion that we should be able to "push out a GA release" at will. There has not even been a public Beta of 1.3 yet. Why are we so eager to publish a GA, when we have not even circulated a Beta for wider field-testing? It's cool that Struts Action 1.3 works for us. But, most days, the nightly builds work for us too. A GA should mean that we *know* it works for the wider user community too. Most ASF projects seem to go through an average three or four betas between GA's. How can we say anything is ready for GA when we haven't even published a Beta yet? -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
On 5/13/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Issue STR-2876 is open for the missing Tiles 1.1 DTD registration, and I'll start a release plan for version 1.3.5. (Would anyone like to volunteer as release manager?) The rest of May is booked, but I could make time in the beginning of June, targeting, say, June 15. Since Struts 1.x is in evolutionary mode right now, so long as new issues are resolved, we might want to try rolling one monthly release after another. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
On 5/14/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: yes, a beta is as good as a killed release because it doesn't get out to the users in an public, accessible location). Ummm, we can submit a Beta for general circulation and mirroring. Right now, today, we're doing that with the Shale *Alpha*. * http://struts.apache.org/downloads.html The GA mark isn't about how we distribute the build, it's about whether we think the build is ready for primetime. The idea is that first we circulate the build to a wider set of users, and then, based on feedback (or the lack thereof), we decide whether to upgrade the Beta to GA. Since the build is already in the mirroring system, if we do upgrade a distribution to GA, then all we have to do is update the website. No fuss, no muss. If it helps, I'd say we could we could even announce the next distribution as * "Stuts Action 1.3.5 Beta (release candidate)". (Given the votes, of course.) I think the only thing that's broken is the notion that a Beta is not a Release Candidate, and that a Beta can't be announced and mirrored. It is, and it can. :) -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
On 5/14/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If it helps, I'd say we could we could even announce the next distribution as * "Stuts Action 1.3.5 Beta (release candidate)". (Given the votes, of course.) I think the only thing that's broken is the notion that a Beta is not a Release Candidate, and that a Beta can't be announced and mirrored. It is, and it can. :) I'd rather not re-introduce the term "release candidate" at this point, especially not in combination with 'Beta'. Under our current guidelines, a Beta *is* a release. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
On 5/13/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For this reason, I believe tiles and scripting should not belong with the struts distribution. I've tried to view them as part of the core product (which the examples and taglib align to), but I can't force myself to believe they are really 1.3 - they are 1.0.1 and 1.3. I recommend we remove them from the distribution and allow them to downloaded separately. Or, give them their real version numbers back. The moves of both Scripting and Tiles were discussed on the dev list before they happened. No objections were raised to folding Scripting into Struts Action. Struts Tiles was also brought back into Struts Action on the theory that even after Standalone Tiles is released, there will still need to be some "glue" code between it and Struts Action, so there will always be a 'struts-tiles' jar. I'd recommend reviewing the archived messages if you haven't already, and then starting another [proposal] thread if you still feel strongly about it. I'm not in favor of splitting any part of the current Struts Action distribution back out into a separate subproject. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
Wendy, the only reason I bring this up (and the only reason), is because I believe the Tiles DTD that has plagued 1.3.4 is a symptom of the decision. Listen to this logic: By making branding Tiles a 1.3.x version, we are directly tying the product to struts. That implies it is only for Struts, and that's not true. It really is its own product, BUT, if our goal is to tie it forever to Struts, then I am okay. I am just bringing it up because we have very much aligned Tiles to Struts with upgrading the Tiles DTD, and when Struts 1.4 comes out, I expect Tiles 1.4 DTD too. I don't have a problem with this, but it needs to be explicilty said that Tiles is a Struts component. If that's what we want, then I am good -- I just want it stated. -- paul --- Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/13/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For this reason, I believe tiles and scripting should not belong > > with the struts distribution. I've tried to view them as part of the > > core product (which the examples and taglib align to), but I can't > > force myself to believe they are really 1.3 - they are 1.0.1 and 1.3. > > > > I recommend we remove them from the distribution and allow them to > > downloaded separately. Or, give them their real version numbers back. > > The moves of both Scripting and Tiles were discussed on the dev list > before they happened. No objections were raised to folding Scripting > into Struts Action. Struts Tiles was also brought back into Struts > Action on the theory that even after Standalone Tiles is released, > there will still need to be some "glue" code between it and Struts > Action, so there will always be a 'struts-tiles' jar. > > I'd recommend reviewing the archived messages if you haven't already, > and then starting another [proposal] thread if you still feel strongly > about it. > > I'm not in favor of splitting any part of the current Struts Action > distribution back out into a separate subproject. > > -- > Wendy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
On 5/14/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Listen to this logic: By making branding Tiles a 1.3.x version, we are directly tying the product to struts. That implies it is only for Struts, and that's not true. Struts Tiles *is* tied directly to Struts Action -- look at the dependency in action/tiles/pom.xml. This is not Standalone Tiles we're talking about. That's in the sandbox and doesn't depend on Struts. I am just bringing it up because we have very much aligned Tiles to Struts with upgrading the Tiles DTD, and when Struts 1.4 comes out, I expect Tiles 1.4 DTD too. Yes. But then, I always thought it was strange that there was no Tiles 1.2 DTD. And yes, this means that once a Struts Action 1.3 release is voted GA, that DTD, along with all the others, the TLDs and the public API, is set. A proposal (or at least a poll) might be in order to see whether we want to keep the Tiles 1.3 DTD or just have 1.1 since it has not changed. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
Wendy, +1 on picking apart my argument :) Thanks for clearing things up for me; I apologize for missing the obvious fact that this isn't Standalone Tiles. I got lost in my philosophy! Thanks again :) --- Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/14/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Listen to this logic: By making branding Tiles a 1.3.x version, > > we are directly tying the product to struts. That implies it > > is only for Struts, and that's not true. > > Struts Tiles *is* tied directly to Struts Action -- look at the > dependency in action/tiles/pom.xml. > > This is not Standalone Tiles we're talking about. That's in the > sandbox and doesn't depend on Struts. > > > I am just bringing it up because we have very much > > aligned Tiles to Struts with upgrading the Tiles DTD, and when > > Struts 1.4 comes out, I expect Tiles 1.4 DTD too. > > Yes. But then, I always thought it was strange that there was no Tiles 1.2 > DTD. > > And yes, this means that once a Struts Action 1.3 release is voted GA, > that DTD, along with all the others, the TLDs and the public API, is > set. > > A proposal (or at least a poll) might be in order to see whether we > want to keep the Tiles 1.3 DTD or just have 1.1 since it has not > changed. > > -- > Wendy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ANN] Struts BOF Wednesday, 5:30 PM, at JavaOne in the Pavilion
Hi Don Do you need a Javaone conference badge to get into the Pavillion? I wanted to invite another developer to the BOF? Also is there any going on the Thirsty Bear this year 2006. I remember you all last year. By the way I am in San Francisco now. "peter dot pilgrim @gmail.com" - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30325&messageID=59595#59595 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Meet Up in San Francisco 2006
Hi Guys I just here in San Francisco. Is there a beer-drinking birds-of-feather planned for the Struts / WebWork developer at Java One 2006? I know last year and the year before that it was all happening at the Thirsty Bear. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30842&messageID=59600#59600 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
On 5/14/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd rather not re-introduce the term "release candidate" at this point, especially not in combination with 'Beta'. Under our current guidelines, a Beta *is* a release. And, so is an Alpha. And we can distribute any release - Alpha, Beta, or GA -- as hard and wide as we like. Then, after distributing the release as a Beta, if no significant issues turn up, we can mark the same distribution as GA. In effect, every release is a release candidate, because every release could be upgraded to GA, should circumstances warrant. But, we should *not* even be thinking about marking a distribution GA until it has been distributed as a public Beta first. That's the part of the process that's been broken lately. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meet Up in San Francisco 2006
There was talk about the Geronimo party, afterwards at the W. Otherwise, Tuesday evening at the Thirsty Bear after the blogger meetup would work nicely. The "beer-drinking" bof is traditionally organized by Van, and he's been pretty busy lately. Don Peter Pilgrim wrote: Hi Guys I just here in San Francisco. Is there a beer-drinking birds-of-feather planned for the Struts / WebWork developer at Java One 2006? I know last year and the year before that it was all happening at the Thirsty Bear. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30842&messageID=59600#59600 - 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]
Re: [ANN] Struts BOF Wednesday, 5:30 PM, at JavaOne in the Pavilion
Peter Pilgrim wrote: Hi Don Do you need a Javaone conference badge to get into the Pavillion? You do need at least a Pavilion badge, which are $100 good only for one day IIRC. Don I wanted to invite another developer to the BOF? Also is there any going on the Thirsty Bear this year 2006. I remember you all last year. By the way I am in San Francisco now. "peter dot pilgrim @gmail.com" - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30325&messageID=59595#59595 - 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]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
The snippet macro is updated. You can use URLs in the following format: org.struts.apache.action2. (links directly to a class in the _core_ module only) action2/... (links from the root of the action2 trunk) We'll need to get all references to the webwork snippets switched over as the next step for the docs. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=29760&messageID=59616#59616 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
We won't be able to use Atlassian's public server - our stuff is just too heavy duty. Contegix (not Contegrix :P) might be interested to help, but I imagine they would probably feel more interested if they were in a position that was more than just an emergency/temporary storage location (eg: official hosting provider for Struts - which I know is a much bigger issue). I'll ask Matthew Porter next week what his thoughts are. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=29760&messageID=59617#59617 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
Unless I'm mistaken, the votes I've always seen come up have three choices: mark a release alpha, beta or GA. This would seem to be the cause of the "problem" with the process to me because it in effect allows the process to be "short circuited", i.e., a newly-rolled release could be marked GA immediately if that's what the vote result was. This is, I think, what your saying Ted. I think the "fix" is to simply have a number of separate votes in sequence, and to make this a known sequence that each release follows. For instance, we start with a 1.3.0 to begin with, and it is marked alpha (not sure if that needs to be voted on). At some point in time after that, someone decides that they think it's good enough to be beta now, so a vote is called and the choices are (a) beta or (b) stay at alpha. Likewise, when someone thinks a beta is good enough for GA, a similar vote is called with only two choices, GA or stay beta. None of these votes can be called unless the previous one was done. It's conceivable you could go from alpha to GA in a few days with this procedure, so it really isn't adding any extra impediment to GA I think. Each release can be distributed as far and wide as you want, and in fact should be, to get as many people testing as possible. Frank Ted Husted wrote: On 5/14/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd rather not re-introduce the term "release candidate" at this point, especially not in combination with 'Beta'. Under our current guidelines, a Beta *is* a release. And, so is an Alpha. And we can distribute any release - Alpha, Beta, or GA -- as hard and wide as we like. Then, after distributing the release as a Beta, if no significant issues turn up, we can mark the same distribution as GA. In effect, every release is a release candidate, because every release could be upgraded to GA, should circumstances warrant. But, we should *not* even be thinking about marking a distribution GA until it has been distributed as a public Beta first. That's the part of the process that's been broken lately. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com AIM: fzammetti Yahoo: fzammetti MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Java Web Parts - http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PROPOSAL] Separate lists for notifications vs. discussion
It looks like this is now basically done (the JIRA issue is complete). The final step will be to unsubscribe the address [EMAIL PROTECTED] from all lists except for the dev@ list. That will keep the forums synced on the OpenSymphony forums limited to just the discussions. I was trying to figure out how to do that myself, but I didn't have a lot of luck. Any hints? > To make it easier to filter and sort messages, and to > facilitate > presenting the lists through alternate interfaces > such as forums and > RSS feeds, I propose that we do the following: > > * establish issues@struts.apache.org and direct JIRA > emails to it > * unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] (svn commit > messages and Wiki diffs) from dev@ > Initially, the subscriber lists for these two could > be copied from > dev@, so that current subscribers are not affected. > (Except for > ossibly needing to reconfigure mail filters.) > > Thanks, > -- > Wendy > > -- > --- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=27726&messageID=59619#59619 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
Lovely. Thx Pat. - Original Message From: Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: dev@struts.apache.org Sent: Monday, 15 May, 2006 1:56:51 AM Subject: Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation The snippet macro is updated. You can use URLs in the following format: org.struts.apache.action2. (links directly to a class in the _core_ module only) action2/... (links from the root of the action2 trunk) We'll need to get all references to the webwork snippets switched over as the next step for the docs. - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=29760&messageID=59616#59616 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meet Up in San Francisco 2006
> There was talk about the Geronimo party, afterwards > at the W. > Otherwise, Tuesday evening at the Thirsty Bear after > the blogger meetup > would work nicely. The "beer-drinking" bof is > traditionally organized > by Van, and he's been pretty busy lately. > The Geronimo party. Who is organising that one? Virtua http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=good_parties_at_javaone I remember Van from last year. Oh well it looks like the Geronimo Party then. Shame about the Borland parties have come to an end since they left the IDE market place. Maybe Sun will get us a decent movie night last year, Batman Returns instead of Star Wars Episode III when the tape got crunched by the projector machine. > Don > > Peter Pilgrim wrote: > > Hi Guys > > > > I just here in San Francisco. Is there a > beer-drinking birds-of-feather planned for the Struts > / WebWork developer at Java One 2006? I know last > year and the year before that it was all happening at > the Thirsty Bear. > > > -- > --- > > Posted via Jive Forums > > > http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30 > 842&messageID=59600#59600 > > > > > > > -- > --- > > 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] > > - Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=30842&messageID=59623#59623 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Action2] Dojo 0.30 released... Time for an update?
Hey, just saw that Dojo released version 0.30. Our Dojo support in SAF/WW 2.2.x is currently based on the "outdated" 0.21 release. Shouldn't we update the embedded Dojo release and try to get our ajax tags running again properly? It sounds like lots of problems with browser support were fixed in the past couple of months. tia, Rainer Rainer Hermanns aixcept Neupforte 16 52062 Aachen - Germany w: http://aixcept.de/ t:+49-241-4012247 m: +49-170-3432912 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
getting SAF2
What is the current state? is there a checklist of functionality and what is done/needs to be done? I am starting a new project and would like to go with SAF2 if possible... The below svn co comes from the wiki pages. There is no project to checkout. What is the status of the project? the docs sound like there is something done/working. How can I get it? svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2/ svn: URL 'https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2' doesn't exist I did find the following in svn but there are no build instructions, no binary etc... http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action2/trunk/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts release process is broken (Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality)
On 5/14/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Each release can be distributed as far and wide as you want, and in fact should be, to get as many people testing as possible. Yes. The reason we stopped putting qualifiers like "beta" and "rc" in the distribution names, was so we could start a distribution out as an alpha or beta, and then upgrade it later, based on actual feedback from the rest of the user community. We get all the benefits of "one more beta", without the extra work. It's hubris for us to say "Hey, this is GA", without ever offering the bits up as a Beta to the general public. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: getting SAF2
There is no SAF2 binary download available yet, but should be soon. We are currently working on this topic. Currently SAF2 is available via SVN only under the following address: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action2/trunk/ To build from source have a look at http://confluence.twdata.org/ display/WW/Building+with+Maven All other documentation can be found here: http:// confluence.twdata.org/display/WW/Home hth, Rainer On May 14, 2006, at 21:18 , hanasaki wrote: What is the current state? is there a checklist of functionality and what is done/needs to be done? I am starting a new project and would like to go with SAF2 if possible... The below svn co comes from the wiki pages. There is no project to checkout. What is the status of the project? the docs sound like there is something done/working. How can I get it? svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2/ svn: URL 'https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2' doesn't exist I did find the following in svn but there are no build instructions, no binary etc... http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action2/trunk/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rainer Hermanns aixcept Neupforte 16 52062 Aachen - Germany w: http://aixcept.de/ t:+49-241-4012247 m: +49-170-3432912 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: getting SAF2
There still might be some API changes in SAF 2, and if you do go with SAF 2 now, you should be prepared to make some arbitrary changes later. Personally, I'd get started with WW 2.2, and then migrate when the SAF 2 build start to roll. -Ted. On 5/14/06, hanasaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What is the current state? is there a checklist of functionality and what is done/needs to be done? I am starting a new project and would like to go with SAF2 if possible... The below svn co comes from the wiki pages. There is no project to checkout. What is the status of the project? the docs sound like there is something done/working. How can I get it? svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2/ svn: URL 'https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2' doesn't exist I did find the following in svn but there are no build instructions, no binary etc... http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action2/trunk/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: getting SAF2
Is there a checklist of what remains to be done in SAF2? Any docs to compare WW2.2 vs SAF2? I never used WW and after reading the docs am not sure if SAF2 is something new or just a new name for WW as it is incorporated into apache. Ted Husted wrote: > There still might be some API changes in SAF 2, and if you do go with > SAF 2 now, you should be prepared to make some arbitrary changes > later. Personally, I'd get started with WW 2.2, and then migrate when > the SAF 2 build start to roll. > > -Ted. > > On 5/14/06, hanasaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> What is the current state? is there a checklist of functionality and >> what is done/needs to be done? I am starting a new project and would >> like to go with SAF2 if possible... >> >> The below svn co comes from the wiki pages. There is no project to >> checkout. What is the status of the project? the docs sound like there >> is something done/working. How can I get it? >> >> svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2/ >> svn: URL 'https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/webwork2' doesn't >> exist >> >> >> I did find the following in svn but there are no build instructions, no >> binary etc... >> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/action2/trunk/ > > > - > 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]
Re: [Action2] Dojo 0.30 released... Time for an update?
Sounds good to me...I'll give it a try today Don Rainer Hermanns wrote: Hey, just saw that Dojo released version 0.30. Our Dojo support in SAF/WW 2.2.x is currently based on the "outdated" 0.21 release. Shouldn't we update the embedded Dojo release and try to get our ajax tags running again properly? It sounds like lots of problems with browser support were fixed in the past couple of months. tia, Rainer Rainer Hermanns aixcept Neupforte 16 52062 Aachen - Germany w: http://aixcept.de/ t:+49-241-4012247 m: +49-170-3432912 - 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]
Re: getting SAF2
On 5/14/06, hanasaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is there a checklist of what remains to be done in SAF2? We're in the middle of porting the documentation and finalizing some fine-points of API changes created by the name-change. But, we are not planning much in the way of new development for SAF 2.0. Any docs to compare WW2.2 vs SAF2? That would come after we've finished porting the documention. In terms of functionality, there may be a couple of new features, like wildcards, but the whole idea is that we've adopted WW 2 as SAF 2. I never used WW and after reading the docs am not sure if SAF2 is something new or just a new name for WW as it is incorporated into apache. SAF 2.0 will be the technical equivalent of WW 2.3. The best path for production development would be to start with WW 2.2 now and migrate later. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] STATUS - Documentation
On 5/14/06, Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We won't be able to use Atlassian's public server - our stuff is just too heavy duty. Is there a particular aspect of "heavy duty" that causes more problems: Too many pages or too many hits? If the size of a space matters, it might make sense to use multiple spaces. I'm finding that larger spaces are harder to export. I haven't been able to export our current space to HTML, but I have had some luck with smaller subsets. If we can get an export working, then we can start posting HTML to the site and funnel visitors to the static pages. The link to the wiki, we can keep with the "How to Help" and "Nightly Build" material. Out of sight, out of mind. But, we do need to fish or cut bait. Right now, it doesn't look like the current configuration is going to work for us, simply because we can't get an export of the space. Regardless, I think I should ask Jeff Turner for a license that we can use for now, before the evaluation expires. Contegix (not Contegrix :P) might be interested to help, but I imagine they would probably feel more interested if they were in a position that was more than just an emergency/temporary storage location (eg: official hosting provider for Struts - which I know is a much bigger issue). I'll ask Matthew Porter next week what his thoughts are. Well, there's yet-another ASF Confluence thread open on infrastructure right now, where someone is offering to donate a dedicated machine. No one has screamed "stop" yet. There's a test instance running now on an ASF host name now, where they are trying to run Confluence and server statically auto exported HTML. But, there's no way to tell if this will work out or not, and how temporary any other arrangements might be. The idea of someone being the official hosting provider of a single ASF project is probably a non-starter. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug report for Struts [2006/05/14]
+---+ | Bugzilla Bug ID | | +-+ | | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned| | | OPN=ReopenedVER=Verified(Skipped Closed/Resolved) | | | +-+ | | | Severity: BLK=Blocker CRI=CriticalMAJ=Major | | | | MIN=Minor NOR=Normal ENH=Enhancement | | | | +-+ | | | | Date Posted | | | | | +--+ | | | | | Description | | | | | | | | 5739|Opn|Enh|2002-01-08|Struts fails silently in too many places | | 5937|New|Enh|2002-01-21|[taglib] html:form trims all extensions | | 6847|New|Enh|2002-03-04|Multiple file upload not possible due to MultiPart| | 7902|Opn|Enh|2002-04-10|The exception handling declaration in the DTD does| | 8240|Ver|Min|2002-04-18|Data-Source configuration in examples is outdated | | 9088|Opn|Enh|2002-05-15|FormTag.getActionMappingURL() assumes 1 servlet ma| | 9616|New|Enh|2002-06-05|Some more Struts docs | | 9748|New|Enh|2002-06-10|[taglib] attribute labelKeyProperty for Options ta| |10550|New|Enh|2002-07-08|Delegate path-management to ActionForwards| |10552|New|Enh|2002-07-08|create helper objects in struts-config| |10867|Opn|Enh|2002-07-16|[taglib] Add indexedProperty attribute in html tag| |11154|Opn|Enh|2002-07-25|[taglib] html:link tag extension for multiple para| |11733|Opn|Enh|2002-08-15|Make error keys more specific | |12170|Opn|Enh|2002-08-29|Added functionality when extending another definit| |12301|Opn|Enh|2002-09-04|[taglib] nested:messages Tag does not work as expe| |12600|New|Enh|2002-09-12|[taglib] html:form tag always prepends context pat| |13125|Opn|Enh|2002-09-30|[taglib] Lack of character-set while using forwardPattern should support differe| |16708|New|Enh|2003-02-03|I18N on ActionForwards| |16764|Opn|Enh|2003-02-04|No inheritance of html:html xhtml="true" in includ| |16792|Ass|Enh|2003-02-05|Migrate to commons-resources for message resources| |16814|New|Enh|2003-02-05|Add a generalized utililty class to expose informa| |16946|Opn|Enh|2003-02-10|SwitchAction not setting context properly for tile| |16971|New|Enh|2003-02-11|[taglib] "multiple" attribute on select tag should| |17368|Opn|Enh|2003-02-25|[taglib] multiple does not populate | |17449|New|Enh|2003-02-26|[taglib] Allow relative URL in action attribute of| |17473|New|Enh|2003-02-27|[taglib] Problem to include a jsp into an iterate | |17530|New|Enh|2003-02-28|RequestUtils.computeURL should use the session ass| |17559|New|Enh|2003-03-01|[tiles] key attribute for tiles (put & item) | |17600|New|Enh|2003-03-03|[taglib] key property for html:optionsCollection t| |17698|Opn|Enh|2003-03-05|The value(key) form name pattern doesn't work with| |18015|Opn|Enh|2003-03-14|[taglib] New custom tag to write form| |18017|Opn|Enh|2003-03-14|[tiles] extends fails in JSP-based Definitions| |18022|New|Enh|2003-03-14|HttpSessionBindingListener.valueUnbound() called o| |18032|Opn|Enh|2003-03-16|[taglib] tag appending session doesn't | |18194|Opn|Enh|2003-03-20|[resources] Enhance MessageResources to enable sev| |18237|Opn|Enh|2003-03-21|[tiles] excessive memory usage| |18293|New|Enh|2003-03-24|Loading language files does not use Resource Bundl| |18788|New|Enh|2003-04-07|Multiple input hook for multipage forms in process| |18981|New|Enh|2003-04-13|[upload] File upload maximum size validator | |19346|New|Enh|2003-04-26|Errors and Messages should be easier to manage| |19539|New|Enh|2003-05-02|Add checks for List and Map-backed properties in D| |19631|New|Enh|2003-05-04|Enhancements to RequestUtils tests| |19812|New|Enh|2003-05-10|[taglib] BaseFieldTag don't use ConvertUtils as St| |19903|New|Enh|2003-05-13|Field considered valid if no ActionError created | |19925|New|Enh|2003-05-14|Server side solution for DispatchAction and : Make value optional when id| |21508|New|Enh|2003-07-11|[tiles] element too restrictive| |21512|New|Enh|2003-07-11|exception tag's path attribute accepts only web re| |21514|New|Enh|2003-07-11|[taglib] html:form focus function could be more po| |21517|New|Enh|2003-07-11|[tiles] definition's put tag works in non-standard| |21575|New|Enh|2003-07-14|RequestProcessor : Populating non-String Bean fiel| |21624|Opn|Enh|2003-07-15|Extend TokenProcessor to handle a list of tra
[action2] Great presentation on API design
I came across this presentation on good API design I thought relevant to our current Action 2 API discussions: http://lcsd05.cs.tamu.edu/slides/keynote.pdf Don - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meet Up in San Francisco 2006
Van is having a Monday night user session on SAF2 by Peabody, I'll be there. .V Peter Pilgrim wrote: The Geronimo party. Who is organising that one? Virtua http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=good_parties_at_javaone I remember Van from last year. Oh well it looks like the Geronimo Party then. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: getting SAF2
On 5/14/06, hanasaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is there a checklist of what remains to be done in SAF2? There is now :) * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsActionRelease200 -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [action2] Great presentation on API design
Thanks for the link. The ThreadLocal discussion toward the end applies directly to the new attributes package. Bob On 5/14/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I came across this presentation on good API design I thought relevant to our current Action 2 API discussions: http://lcsd05.cs.tamu.edu/slides/keynote.pdf Don - 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]
Re: [VOTE] Struts Action Framework v1.3.4 Quality
On 5/14/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: And yes, this means that once a Struts Action 1.3 release is voted GA, that DTD, along with all the others, the TLDs and the public API, is set. Oh, we've managed to make significant changes to the public APIs over the years. Most often, it's just a matter of introducing an alternative, deprecating the unfavored member, and then removing it in a subsequent release. In Struts 1.0, the Action perform method threw ServletException, in Struts 1.1 we changed that to an execute method that throws Exception. Come Struts 1.2, perform is removed for good. And here we are talking about *the* most visible member in the Action API. More recently, between 1.2.8 and 1.2.9 we just plain broke the API for the Cancel button -- because we felt resolving a security issue was more important than introducing a sudden change. Anything in any API can be changed. If something in 1.3 doesn't work well, or something better comes along, we can bring out 1.4 on any day of the week. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Action2] Dojo 0.30 released... Time for an update?
On 5/14/06, Rainer Hermanns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hey, just saw that Dojo released version 0.30. Built and released from the audience at The Ajax Experience on Friday, literally 5 minutes before the start of Brad Neuberg's presentation on dojo.storage. ;-) (We have _got_ to find an excuse to use Dojo's storage / offline stuff in Struts - that stuff is way cool!) Our Dojo support in SAF/WW 2.2.x is currently based on the "outdated" 0.21 release. Shouldn't we update the embedded Dojo release and try to get our ajax tags running again properly? Definitely. The 0.3 release is a huge update (and improvement) over 0.2.x. -- Martin Cooper It sounds like lots of problems with browser support were fixed in the past couple of months. tia, Rainer Rainer Hermanns aixcept Neupforte 16 52062 Aachen - Germany w: http://aixcept.de/ t:+49-241-4012247 m: +49-170-3432912 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
