On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 08:16 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
If we find a way how these could work I wouldn't mind if we get rid of the
current solution.
Your wish is my command.
When thinking about it, this one wasn't possible with my solution either. So,
probably lets not put this
Sorry for top posting, the handy client makes it hard to make it right.
What you have done so far is great I think.
But there is a third way of configuring a converter.
This is configuring a converter with its own tag, like dateTimeConverter. This
allows you to configure this very instance of
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 09:44 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Sorry for top posting, the handy client makes it hard to make it right.
What you have done so far is great I think.
But there is a third way of configuring a converter.
This is configuring a converter with its own tag, like
Hi!
But there is a third way of configuring a converter.
This is configuring a converter with its own tag, like dateTimeConverter.
This allows you to configure this very instance of the converter.
We don't need to support pulling f:dateTimeConverter instances from
Spring do we? Those