Will do this tomorrow... Already assigned to me...
> Does someone want to port this over?
>
> --
> James Mitchell
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2006, at 5:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> User: pat
>> Date: 2006/04/30 14:27:41
>>
>> Modified:
>>webwork/src/test/XSLTResultTest3.xsl
>>
>> Log:
>> Iss
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
Excellent and thanks for all your help.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 30, 2006, at 6:41 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
My bad - fixed. Sorry for the inconvenience.
I have also subscribed all committers to the 'allow' list for commits
to save the moderators some time.
Cheers,
Brett
On 5/1/06, James M
My bad - fixed. Sorry for the inconvenience.
I have also subscribed all committers to the 'allow' list for commits
to save the moderators some time.
Cheers,
Brett
On 5/1/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Same here.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 30, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Wendy Smoak wr
Does someone want to port this over?
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 30, 2006, at 5:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User: pat
Date: 2006/04/30 14:27:41
Modified:
webwork/src/test/XSLTResultTest3.xsl
Log:
Issue number: WW-1255
Obtained from:
Submitted by:
Reviewed by:
The stylesheet used
Even prior to the SAF merger I've always thought it should be
action.xml. Only the action.vm feels a bit awkward to me. My
preference would be default.vm, base.vm, or something like that.
On 4/30/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Heretofore, the WebWork product was being distributed by O
Same here.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 30, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 4/30/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not long after this, the moderation emails came in.
For issues@ or [EMAIL PROTECTED] I received a couple of moderation emails for
issues, (and I see someo
On 4/30/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not long after this, the moderation emails came in.
For issues@ or [EMAIL PROTECTED] I received a couple of moderation emails for
issues, (and I see someone already let them through,) but my commit
message from yesterday bounced with:
Hi
Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/28/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I call a vote that the Struts PMC accept the WebWork 2 podling as having
met the incubation requirements and thereby be
accepted by the Apache Struts project as Struts Action 2.
A couple of things I noticed on a quick sc
Not long after this, the moderation emails came in.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 29, 2006, at 9:46 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 4/29/06, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's because this was *not* a vote. It was a proposal. The +1's,
+0s, etc.
do not count as votes but as expression
Heretofore, the WebWork product was being distributed by OpenSymphony
as WebWork 2. Now, the Action product is be distributed by Apache
Struts as Action 2.
In a prior discussion ("XWork and Struts Action 2.0 "), there was a
suggestion that we rename
* xwork.xml to struts-action.xml
which could
>> * PortletUrlTagTest.java has a copyright for BEKK Consulting but not one
>> for
>> the ASF. Are we sure we're OK for IP on this one?
> Just contacted Nils-Helge Garli about this. He contributed the code and I
> remember that for all other contributed files the copyright was changed.
> Looks like
See comments inline...
> * There are still quite a few files that have OS copyrights but not ASF
> ones.
>
> * PortletUrlTagTest.java has a copyright for BEKK Consulting but not one
> for
> the ASF. Are we sure we're OK for IP on this one?
Just contacted Nils-Helge Garli about this. He contributed
I will be out of the office starting 30.04.2006 and will not return until
15.05.2006.
Even heavy workers need training, and so I am currently on education tour
until mid of May, getting more insight into SOA architectures and
enterprise computing. So I get fit and and work remote and mobile. Ple
14 matches
Mail list logo
