Review Request: Need to expose OAuth2 metadata to the container

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3571/ --- Review request for shindig and Henry Saputra. Summary --- Need to expose OA

Re: Review Request: Change GadgetSite and UrlSite to both inherit from a common Site class, and GadgetHolder and UrlHolder to inherit from a common SiteHolder class

> On 2012-01-20 18:52:13, Stanton Sievers wrote: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/test/javascript/lib/testutils.js, > > line 143 > > > > > > No whitespace please :) You would bring that up

Re: Review Request: Change GadgetSite and UrlSite to both inherit from a common Site class, and GadgetHolder and UrlHolder to inherit from a common SiteHolder class

> On 2012-01-20 18:52:13, Stanton Sievers wrote: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js, > > line 162 > > > > > > Was this ever even used before? I

Re: Review Request: Change GadgetSite and UrlSite to both inherit from a common Site class, and GadgetHolder and UrlHolder to inherit from a common SiteHolder class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3531/#review4500 --- Ship it! LGTM. Pretty straightforward even though the diff initially

Re: Review Request: SHINDIG-1678 The flash transport to support RPC for IE7 has problem with multiple gadgets in a single container

> On 2012-01-20 17:24:54, Stanton Sievers wrote: > > LGTM. Thanks Henry! To clarify, is this only an issue in IE7 or would it > > be an issue with any browser that uses the flash transport? Theoretically > > you could force RPC to always use flash, regardless of the browser, by > > setting

Re: Review Request: SHINDIG-1678 The flash transport to support RPC for IE7 has problem with multiple gadgets in a single container

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3566/#review4496 --- Ship it! LGTM. Thanks Henry! To clarify, is this only an issue in I

Re: Shindig 3.0 timeline

Paul, Our team is reviewing the list of open JIRAs as requested, and I think we will have a response back to you on Monday or tuesday. I think it would be much more predictable for the community and dependent products, if we published a schedule for locking down 3.0, with some one or two release

Review Request: SHINDIG-1678 The flash transport to support RPC for IE7 has problem with multiple gadgets in a single container

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3566/ --- Review request for shindig and johnfargo. Summary --- See "SHINDIG-1678 The

Re: Review Request: A patch that enables API for updating person data

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3544/#review4491 --- Small nits on whitespace. I do have some bigger questions regarding t

RE: Shindig 3.0 timeline

Any chance SHINDIG-1497 will be fixed in 3.0.0 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1497)? How can a new version be released with such an important feature (pubsub-2) in a broken state? I am not allowed to contribute, but will be happy to provide information to anyone who is willing t

Re: Shindig 3.0 timeline

I'm not keen on version numbers myself. We can release at any time really, code is stable, tests are all green. If someone wants to sign up to do maint releases of 3.0.x that would be helpful. Vote: Release current trunk as shindig-3.0.0, move trunk to 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT [ ] +1 do it [ ] +0

Re: Shindig 3.0 timeline

Hi, Didn't catch a reply to this? Could you tell me when stable shindig 3.0 is due for public release? Thanks Derek On 16 Jan 2012, at 10:57, Evgeny Bogdanov wrote: > Hello, > > when the shindig 3.0 is due? > > Best > Evgeny