John Casey wrote:
> Stupid question maybe, but can we deprecate the method using
> o.c.d.s.Sink, and duplicate the method to one that takes an
> o.a.m.d.s.Sink instance? Then at least we may be able to soften the
> eventual blow of moving off to the new APIs at some later time.
I did that originall
Stupid question maybe, but can we deprecate the method using
o.c.d.s.Sink, and duplicate the method to one that takes an
o.a.m.d.s.Sink instance? Then at least we may be able to soften the
eventual blow of moving off to the new APIs at some later time.
Other than this, it all sounds great. BTW
Ok, we only need to match up the sink, and by doing that in the api that
takes care of it. Everything is in the impl and selected by the
reporting plugin. If it upgrades to a new one, they need to change all
their references. I've tried this, and as long as the references are
updated correctly, it
John Casey wrote:
> I was planning to release a RC version tonight, but if you think you
> can make improvements in this Doxia two-step we're putting together
> here, I think that is more important than a couple of days' time. I'll
> spend my time in more productive ways - namely, documenting the
>
I was planning to release a RC version tonight, but if you think you can
make improvements in this Doxia two-step we're putting together here, I
think that is more important than a couple of days' time. I'll spend my
time in more productive ways - namely, documenting the release process I
used
Hi,
I've had to fiddle with a few scenarios and think I can improve on the
Doxia sink mechanism. I'd like to include this in 2.0.2, but by the same
token I don't want to disrupt the release process/timing too much.
Basically:
- move the sink adapter to doxia-sink-api instead of reporting-api
- h
