.. Original Message ...
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 00:56:51 +0200 Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A very late reminder!!
>>
>> Date: Sunday 25 2004.
>> Time: 14:00 UTC
>
>...to late for me. Is there a log online?
>What are the results of the discussion?
>
>cheers
>--
>Torsten
A
Time: 1400 UTC
Date: 25 April 2004
Venue: irc.freenode.net
Channel: #ApacheAvalon
Agenda;
* The Proposal of "Gang of Nine" - Move ECM+Fortress to CodeHaus.
* The Counter-proposal of Niclas Hedhman - Merlin TLP
Full log available at; http://www.apache.org/~niclas/irc/2004-04-25.150335.t
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 04:51:35PM -0700, Christopher Oliver wrote:
> >
> > http://www.bar.org";
> value="${bar}"/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> > The start element event for must be buffered until
> all potential
> > jx:attribute tags have been pr
Torsten Curdt wrote:
A very late reminder!!
Date: Sunday 25 2004. Time: 14:00 UTC
...to late for me. Is there a log online?
What are the results of the discussion?
Yeah, and what channel was it on for that matter?
Tony
A very late reminder!!
Date: Sunday 25 2004.
Time: 14:00 UTC
...to late for me. Is there a log online?
What are the results of the discussion?
cheers
--
Torsten
On Apr 25, 2004, at 2:14 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
At a certain point, though, we mangled the form *definition* and
modified a selection list so that it was taking its data from a
cocoon:/ pipeline instead than from a static file (which we used
during prototyping). Such
On Apr 25, 2004, at 11:18 PM, Leszek Gawron wrote:
Could anybody explain why I get ConcurrentModificationException with
this
code:
this is a known "issue" with the FileSource: if you look at your
context directory, you will see a test.xml.tmp file (or something of
sort). Remove it and you'll be
As I recall CForms is still Woody in 2.1.4 and marked unstable to boot. The
decision to rename it to CForms was OK'd on the basis that it hasn't been
marked stable yet. If it is still unstable in 2.1.5 then you don't have to
guarantee compatibility. However, once you mark it stable you need to lea
On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 11:15:43PM +0200, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Il giorno 25/apr/04, alle 13:43, Leszek Gawron ha scritto:
>
> >What about simple #{/docs}?
>
> Wouldn't this put a element in the output? I don't need it.
>
AFAIU docs variable is an array of DOM objects - how can it emit tag ?
Firs
Could anybody explain why I get ConcurrentModificationException with this
code:
function test() {
var str = "[EMAIL
PROTECTED]1abcabcdabce";
var buffer = new Packages.com.mobilebox.test.OrderSaxBuffer();
stringToSAX( str, buffer, "true" );
var resolver = n
Il giorno 25/apr/04, alle 13:43, Leszek Gawron ha scritto:
What about simple #{/docs}?
Wouldn't this put a element in the output? I don't need it.
Ugo
Upayavira wrote:
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 24 Apr 2004, at 18:43, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Upayavira wrote_
Personally, I think getting CForms out in its current form is
worth a release.
Yes!
IMO it's worth a release as a 2.2 since CForms are a quite a huge
addition (even if not breaking c
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Marc Portier wrote:
Sorry for the massive commit, however when walking around the code it
only looked like the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
Sorry for the delay, but, as we say here "later is better than never"!
yep, thx for chiming in
> - left quite some TODO ma
the lenya community is organzing a lenya sprint on may 14 and 15
in zurich, switzerland.
we will focus on repository integration, but people with other interests
are also welcome, of course.
more information is available at:
http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=LenyaSprints
http://wiki.cocoon
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 23 Apr 2004, at 11:44, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
with SVN we will have this dir structure:
/cocoon
/trunk
/site
/src
...
/branches
/cocoon2.1
/site
/src
...
Please read play with SVN a bit, as it has a different and better way
Christopher Oliver wrote:
Bruno Dumon wrote:
I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
Form.showForm()
===
I find that this function hides too much of how a form is processed, and
stands
Bruno Dumon wrote:
I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
Form.showForm()
===
I find that this function hides too much of how a form is processed, and
stands in the way of doing more a
Ugo Cei wrote:
Il giorno 24/apr/04, alle 23:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
coliver 2004/04/24 14:35:35
Modified:src/java/org/apache/cocoon/generation
JXTemplateGenerator.java
Log:
Allow a nodeset to be returned as the result of xpath evaluation
Before t
On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 16:25, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 14:54, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Bruno Dumon wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
> >>>CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it
Bruno Dumon wrote:
On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 14:54, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Bruno Dumon wrote:
I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
Form.showForm()
===
I find that this function h
On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 15:10, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Marc Portier wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sorry for the massive commit, however when walking around the code it
> > only looked like the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
>
>
> Sorry for the delay, but, as we say here "later is better than never"!
mieux
On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 14:54, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
>
> >I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
> >CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
> >
> >Form.showForm()
> >===
> >I find that this function hides
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 24 Apr 2004, at 18:43, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Upayavira wrote_
Personally, I think getting CForms out in its current form is
worth a release.
Yes!
IMO it's worth a release as a 2.2 since CForms are a quite a huge
addition (even if not breaking compatiblity)...
Well, a
Marc Portier wrote:
Sorry for the massive commit, however when walking around the code it
only looked like the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
Sorry for the delay, but, as we say here "later is better than never"!
> - left quite some TODO markers for next sweaps
Maybe some of you have some
Bruno Dumon wrote:
I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
Form.showForm()
===
I find that this function hides too much of how a form is processed, and
stands in the way of doing more a
On 24 Apr 2004, at 18:43, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Upayavira wrote_
Personally, I think getting CForms out in its current form is
worth a release.
Yes!
IMO it's worth a release as a 2.2 since CForms are a quite a huge
addition (even if not breaking compatiblity)...
Pier
smime.p7s
Description:
On 23 Apr 2004, at 19:14, Ralph Goers wrote:
As I understood Carsten's reasoning, 2.1.5 cannot be released because
it
introduces an incompatibility with 2.1.4. Therefore he was
recommending NOT
having a 2.1.5 but going to 2.2 instead. 2.1 would basically be dead.
+1 :-) And move kernel developm
On 23 Apr 2004, at 11:44, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
with SVN we will have this dir structure:
/cocoon
/trunk
/site
/src
...
/branches
/cocoon2.1
/site
/src
...
Please read play with SVN a bit, as it has a different and better way
to handle these things
I
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
We are currently building a cforms based application with fairly
decent complexity level. Our (rather convoluted but, take my word for
that, legit) business logic requires the usage of an Avalon component
during the binding phase, so we thought to use the fb:javascript
On 23 Apr 2004, at 10:03, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
I think we should use one repository per major version, so one
repository for all 2.x versions (except 2.0.x versions that we
leave the way it is).
Can't we just have ONE repository for ALL? it's just makes life easier
when copying/moving files aro
On 24 Apr 2004, at 18:48, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Apache HTTPD is (I believe) doing this: 2.0 is "stable", 2.1
is "unstable", and it will be released further down along the
platform either as 2.2 (if backwards compatibility can be
preserved) or 3.0 (if the new design emerged in 2.1 requires
major
On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 12:52:34PM +0200, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Il giorno 24/apr/04, alle 23:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
>
> >coliver 2004/04/24 14:35:35
> >
> > Modified:src/java/org/apache/cocoon/generation
> >JXTemplateGenerator.java
> > Log:
> > Allow a node
On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 04:51:35PM -0700, Christopher Oliver wrote:
> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>
> >Sorry to bother you privately but I did not get the answer on cocoon group
> >and
> >I see you're the main JXTG developer.
> >
> >My question is: Is there any real reason that jx:attribute is not
> >i
I'm a bit annoyed by the current status of our flowscript API's for
CForms. I'll leave the intro for what it is and just jump right into it:
Form.showForm()
===
I find that this function hides too much of how a form is processed, and
stands in the way of doing more advanced stuff.
I p
Il giorno 24/apr/04, alle 23:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
coliver 2004/04/24 14:35:35
Modified:src/java/org/apache/cocoon/generation
JXTemplateGenerator.java
Log:
Allow a nodeset to be returned as the result of xpath evaluation
Before this change, I had
On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 04:51:35PM -0700, Christopher Oliver wrote:
> Leszek Gawron wrote:
>
> >Sorry to bother you privately but I did not get the answer on cocoon group
> >and
> >I see you're the main JXTG developer.
> >
> >My question is: Is there any real reason that jx:attribute is not
> >i
37 matches
Mail list logo
