Use inputFileUpload controler, When click the submit or reset button, will show
Error 500--Internal Server Error.
-
Key: TOMAHAWK-1223
URL:
No concerns from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list,
so I will commit the code now.
Thx,
Matthias
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... it has been a while...
but, yesterday Sam Ruby confirmed that the grant is now on file.
I updated the JIRA ticket and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-744?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf updated TRINIDAD-744:
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.2.8-core
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-14?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf resolved TRINIDAD-14.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.2.8-core
1.0.8-core
Hi!
Sorry for the lengthy mail ... Solving this problem just made me crazy
so easy problem, and so complicate if not impossible solution with JSF.
Everything I toucht in the last couple of days had some
side-effect/influence on something else.
My simple country/zip immediate show city ppr
Hi,
I wasn't in my best creative disposition in the last period, so I made two
logos for Trinidad :)
What's your opinion ... about those logos ?
Mathias what do you think ? :)
Bye
Adonis
On 3/27/08, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Adonis,
do you mind to create one for
hello adonis,
they are really nice!
regards,
gerhard
2008/3/31, Adonis Raduca [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
I wasn't in my best creative disposition in the last period, so I made two
logos for Trinidad :)
What's your opinion ... about those logos ?
Mathias what do you think ? :)
Bye
Great work Adonis,
My favorite is the top one.
Thank you,
Matt
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Adonis Raduca
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I wasn't in my best creative disposition in the last period, so I made two
logos for Trinidad :)
What's your opinion ... about those logos ?
Mathias
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Matt Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great work Adonis,
My favorite is the top one.
+1
thanks for doing that!
-M
Thank you,
Matt
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Adonis Raduca
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I wasn't in my best
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMAHAWK-1220?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Grant Smith updated TOMAHAWK-1220:
--
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
Applied patch, corrected
Top one as well.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Matt Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great work Adonis,
My favorite is the top one.
+1
thanks for doing that!
-M
Thank you,
Matt
On
Well, they are and they aren't related. In Trinidad the
ExternalContextUtils were developed as part of the configurator system.
Just turns out that once we had the utility, it had other uses outside
of the configurator framework. Current (with the externalContextUtils
*IN* the configurator
Hi!
What do you think about an enhancement for ppr which allows to customize
the DOM update of the response?
So, instead of the simple domElement.innerHtml=xx stuff, one is able
to hook into that and provide his/hers own dom update.
s:pprPanelGroup
They both look nice to me, whichever is fine
-Andrew
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Simon Lessard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Top one as well.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Matt Cooper [EMAIL
They both look great to me too! Thanks!
Bruno
On 31/03/2008, Andrew Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They both look nice to me, whichever is fine
-Andrew
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Simon Lessard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Top one as well.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:51
I am wondering whether the event of JSF 2.0 would not be a good
moment to create a new component set.
Well... another component set?
The main thoughts behind it are
- the 3 MyFaces component sets
- are somewhat incompatible
- have each their good points
- have some weak points
- are
Hi!
Now it would be possible to update each component set to JSF 2.0...
but a Tomahawk/JSF2 is expected to be backward compatible. So it
would be difficult to radically change components or eliminate some
duplicates...
+1
I'd like to see this too, though, I think Oracle wouldn't give up
+0
While I see the merit of starting over (and certainly wouldn't argue
against a new component set based off of 2.0), I don't think we should
abadon/restrict renderkits from continuing to support emerging
standards. I know that many of the folks on Trinidad are interested in
supporting 2.0
On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 17:59 +0200, Adonis Raduca wrote:
Hi,
We have new logos for Tobago and Orchestra :)
The general opinion seemed to be that the Orchestra one was good. So if
you can send it to me I'll add it to the website (the original post had
the orchestra and trinidad icons in one
Well Trinidad is not an Oracle product, it's an Apache product.
Nonetheless, I imagine it would be a good bet that Oracle would want to
continue to support Trinidad going forward. That said, there is no
reason that someone couldn't start a new renderkit. The code is
open-sourced. I just
Jesse Alexander (KSFH 323) wrote:
I am wondering whether the event of JSF 2.0 would not be a good
moment to create a new component set.
I'd like to chime in here with my +1.
I imagine maintaining three separate-but-similar component sets is quite
a bit of work and, from what I can tell
Tomahawk certainly does need a radical refresh. It's got some useful
stuff, but is very ugly internally.
There is slow work going on at the moment on something called the
myfaces commons projects (or some similar name). The idea is to split
up tomahawk into about 4 different pieces. At the same
I would still echo sentiments that it would be most helpful to start
from an existing project. There are so many issues and requirements
that the existing renderkits have had years to work out, I think it
would be a much better starting point. Encouraging people to move off
of their existing
I don't see why not we could start a new component set for jsf 2.0 if there
is enough interest within the developers and users. This is a community
thing and if people worked heavily in such a project and the result was
good, I don't see why it should not exist. If others want to maintain
Trinidad
You're absolutely right that it can happen if enough people are
interested in doing it. That's what OSS is all about. And if it happens,
that would be great.
My comment is just about what is *likely* to happen without any sudden
new inflow of volunteers. The original poster suggested it would be
You beat me to it.. :)
simon wrote:
You're absolutely right that it can happen if enough people are
interested in doing it. That's what OSS is all about. And if it happens,
that would be great.
My comment is just about what is *likely* to happen without any sudden
new inflow of volunteers.
Bruno, I totally agree, but we don't want a lot of dead projects out
there either. My point, and I think Simon's as well, is that much of
the contributions to the MyFaces Projects and renderkits comes from
companies and individuals who have a vested interest in supporting the
existing
Whether it is done by updating one of the existing projects to 2.0 first
and then enhancing it with the additional functions or by starting from
scratch, I think that it is a good idea to get one solid component set
for JSF 2.0 that would consolidate the requirements that are currently
This was in my last letter I sent (sorry about the muti-threading, I
just got on a kick and can't seem to stop), I think you're looking at a
separate project through incubator which would, eventually, move into
MyFaces once it's ready.
The nice thing about incubator is that it's built around
That is a good point and this is even worse. Shale not only has an
existing code base, but also an existing community.
I wouldn't argue if you guys wanted to move shale-test over though. :)
The Bridge needs something similar to support testing of portlet JSF
functionality. But that is a
Good work Adonis. I wish I had 1/10th your talent. :)
My favorite is the top one as well.
Scott
Matt Cooper wrote:
Great work Adonis,
My favorite is the top one.
Thank you,
Matt
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Adonis Raduca
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I wasn't in my best creative
I'd like to update to a more recent jmock first
Sent from my iPod.
Am 31.03.2008 um 23:07 schrieb Scott O'Bryan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
That is a good point and this is even worse. Shale not only has an
existing code base, but also an existing community.
I wouldn't argue if you guys wanted to
-Original Message-
From: Scott O'Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:07 PM
To: MyFaces Development
Subject: Re: JSF 2.0 component set
That is a good point and this is even worse. Shale not only has an
existing code base, but also an existing community.
Cool, yay.. Not only can the bridge use it for some testing, but I've
got a commons project I'd like to use it with. Not to mention Trinidad.
I wouldn't argue if you guys wanted to move shale-test over though. :)
The Bridge needs something similar to support testing of portlet JSF
Hidden fields rendered before end of form not work
--
Key: MYFACES-1846
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1846
Project: MyFaces Core
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12583976#action_12583976
]
Leonardo Uribe commented on MYFACES-1692:
-
Checking the javascript code of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1005?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf updated TRINIDAD-1005:
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.2.8-core
37 matches
Mail list logo
