---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/1237/#review1258
---
Ship it!
Thanks for the offline explanation.
Using a queue for each f
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/1237/
---
(Updated 2011-08-02 00:57:26.689862)
Review request for shindig and Michael Herm
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/1237/
---
Review request for shindig and Michael Hermanto.
Summary
---
The previous m
Thanks. Works
On 8/1/11 5:18 PM, "Michael Hermanto" wrote:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4816065/
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:13 PM, daviesd wrote:
>
>> If anyone discovers a quick fix to get by in the meantime, please post. I
>> just recently moved off of 3.0.0-beta2 to pick up some of
http://codereview.appspot.com/4816065/
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:13 PM, daviesd wrote:
> If anyone discovers a quick fix to get by in the meantime, please post. I
> just recently moved off of 3.0.0-beta2 to pick up some of the recent common
> container changes. It'd be nice if maybe we get a bet
If anyone discovers a quick fix to get by in the meantime, please post. I
just recently moved off of 3.0.0-beta2 to pick up some of the recent common
container changes. It'd be nice if maybe we get a beta3 once this is stable?
doug
On 8/1/11 4:55 PM, "Ryan J Baxter" wrote:
> Cool thanks John.
Cool thanks John.
-Ryan
Email: rjbax...@us.ibm.com
Phone: 978-899-3041
developerWorks Profile
From: John Hjelmstad
To: dev@shindig.apache.org,
Cc: johnfa...@gmail.com
Date: 08/01/2011 01:24 PM
Subject:Re: None of the examples are working in HEAD
I don't think it has to
I don't think it has to do with those changes, but may have to do with some
others that I made last week to exportJs(). I'm looking into this now.
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Ryan J Baxter wrote:
> Phil, I am also seeing this.
>
> John, could this have anything to do with these changes?
> h
Yeah, I had found Doug's issue previously where he's called out the root
cause in the gadget handler service.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1549
You are right that the spec doesn't define a default view. The metadata
request needs a valid view if you are requesting the ifrmUrl p
Yes, I think that is the reason. So Shindig has this support for "default"
view when request to render gadget does not contain information about which
view need to be rendered.
AFAIK the spec does not specify what views should be the default one which I
think it means should it interpreted by the
Phil,
This possibly might be the same issue I reported
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1549
The common container doesn¹t render gadgets that don¹t have a default view.
When I try this gadget I get
[{"id":"gadgets.metadata","result":{"http://www.labpixies.com/campaigns/todo
/todo.
I looked into this recently too as it was brought up by somebody on our
side that it was no longer rendering properly in Shindig 3.0.0. Seemed
like the root cause had to do with the fact that the ToDo gadget didn't
have a "default" view which was problematic for the sample container. I
guess sin
12 matches
Mail list logo
