[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12610899#action_12610899
]
burghard.w.v.britzke commented on TRINIDAD-1139:
yes you are right! it
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-119?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12610902#action_12610902
]
Michael Oswald commented on TRINIDAD-119:
-
So I was using the following when
Hi Leonardo,
I tried to upgrade to the latest Tomahawk+Sandbox and now the
application fails to run properly as the
TomahawkFacesContextWrapper does the AddResource processing AND
the ExtensionsFilter does the AddResource processing.
The code in extension filter that do
Table throws javascript error alert when click on 'Select None' (
rowSelection=multiple autoSubmit=true) when no rows on selection and thus
blocks any further operations
Hello everyone
as some know, I have been working semi silently the last months in my
opensource time on a jsf dojo layer which is rather extensive, it is a
thin layer on top of dojo currently encapsulating around 23-25 of the
existing dijit components
(around 98% of the dijit components)
I
No decision yet...
I would call it extensions, or something alike not really dojo
maybe we add other frameworks as well in the long run.
Werner
Ernst Fastl schrieb:
If moving to sandbox complicates the process a lot then maybe it would
be the better idea to, as you initially suggested, start
So my question is, are we going to host it inside of myfaces as its own
subproject or as part of the sandbox or maybe I can move the codebase over
to its own project outside of apache (jsfcomp for instance might be a
perfect place until the entire complib is matured enough)
since it was
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
So my question is, are we going to host it inside of myfaces as its own
subproject or as part of the sandbox or maybe I can move the codebase over
to its own project outside of apache (jsfcomp for instance might be a
perfect place until the entire complib is matured
Not sure if the development is outside of the apache community
the I wrote basically every single line of code so far myself.
but not under an Apache umbrella.
(Except for dojo)
The extensive table component which is pending, is a shared work
with all people involved having committer
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
Not sure if the development is outside of the apache community
the I wrote basically every single line of code so far myself.
but not under an Apache umbrella.
(Except for dojo)
The extensive table component which is pending, is a shared work
with all people
Well best probably is to ask there, but I dont think there should
be too much of a problem of getting it in directly without
having to go through the incubator, due to the nature of the code being
developed 100% by me.
I am fine with that. But I just want to make sure everything is fine
and
Hi Leonardo,
- the error-handling (also making it possible to handle multiple
errors) needs to remain in MyFaces core
- the new feature with the navigation can be one of the error-handlers
that can be configured, and can surely reside in the sandbox...
@Seam: I doubt that Seam can do proper
Hi Mario,
One possible enhancement to the error handling feature of myfaces
could be the capability of redirect to a jsf page.
Any concrete use-case for this, or just yet another
cool-we-can-make-it thingy? ;-)
the use-case is that people want the same type of functionality they
have in
Yes, definitely incubator should be kept in the loop. But I feel a
Grant should be enough, if it is part of the sandbox.
regards,
Martin
On 7/7/08, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well best probably is to ask there, but I dont think there should
be too much of a problem of
Ok I dropped a mail in the incubator mailing list lets wait
for the answers.
Werner
Martin Marinschek schrieb:
Yes, definitely incubator should be kept in the loop. But I feel a
Grant should be enough, if it is part of the sandbox.
regards,
Martin
On 7/7/08, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL
It's great that people are thinking carefully about the right way to
handle this new code. But after some pondering, I'm happy for it to go
directly into a sandbox here and not through the incubator.
My reasons are:
Incubation is necessary when a brand-new project is created, in order to
be
Hi Simon,
On 7/7/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's great that people are thinking carefully about the right way to
handle this new code. But after some pondering, I'm happy for it to go
directly into a sandbox here and not through the incubator.
I would say so as well - a
Hi,
I think it is fine here. My main reason for the incubator list was
just b/c this project
was completely developed offline. So, it is (to me) a new project. That's all.
For me, a software grant would be pretty much enough.
-M
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 5:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
Hi Hazem,
I would think this should be configurable - we should however also
keep the existing behaviour.
regards,
Martin
On 6/27/08, Hazem Saleh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Team,
The (1122) issue suggests a complete change in the behavior of the (popup)
component.
1. Adding the popup
Hello all,
I would like to know how to get a patch into an upcoming Trinidad
release. I have uploaded the (almost trivial) patch to the JIRA issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1095
What is now the next step? How can I get this code reviewed and
eventually committed?
Thanks,
Hi,
thanks for the heads-up.
I am currently doing another review and will do the same for your patch as well.
Thanks for the patch and the interest in Trinidad.
-Matthias
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Dirk Krummacker
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I would like to know how to get a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1095?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf updated TRINIDAD-1095:
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.2.9-core
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russel (SUN)
agreed that a software grant is fine.
-M
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I think it is fine here. My main reason for the incubator list was
just b/c this project
was completely developed offline. So, it
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-745?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf updated TRINIDAD-745:
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.2.9-core
1.0.9-core
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Leonardo,
I tried to upgrade to the latest Tomahawk+Sandbox and now the application
fails to run properly as the TomahawkFacesContextWrapper does the
AddResource processing AND the ExtensionsFilter does the
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russel (SUN)
agreed that a software grant is fine.
Ok then those things are cleared up, now back to the original question
sandbox or own subproject?
Both options are fine for me, but with the sandbox I have to clearly
make comments in
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Werner Punz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
On [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russel (SUN)
agreed that a software grant is fine.
Ok then those things are cleared up, now back to the original question
sandbox or own subproject?
+1 to its own
Hi!
the use-case is that people want the same type of functionality they
have in their web.xml (specifying an error-page per exception) in the
JSF-world as well. Just doing it in the web.xml is not sufficient, as
then the faces-context is already closed and not available anymore, so
important
Hi!
Ok then those things are cleared up, now back to the original question
sandbox or own subproject?
+1 for own subproject.
Any further influence with tomahawk/sandbox needs to be avoided.
These two projects are still waiting for a overhaul themself.
Ciao,
Mario
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Ok then those things are cleared up, now back to the original question
sandbox or own subproject?
+1 for own subproject.
+1 as well
-M
Any further influence with tomahawk/sandbox needs to be avoided.
These
+1 for a subproject as well.
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Ok then those things are cleared up, now back to the original question
sandbox or own subproject?
+1 for subproject.
It'll make it easier to use the same framework for other Ajax libraries,
too, as Werner suggested.
~~~
Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action
http://www.virtua.com/ http://www.virtua.com -
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Jihoon Kim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I had some questions while refactoring the code using the annotations
of myfaces-builder-plugin and was wondering if I was simply using it
incorrectly or if it is yet to be implemented [since I am currently
pointing to
33 matches
Mail list logo
