On 1/12/07, David H. DeWolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree that we need to work on simplifying the tags, but I'm not sure
whether or not functions are the way to go.
Well, I'd definitely say that my interest in functions is as much about
"hey, don't forget they're out there" as "we really
Joe Germuska wrote:
It still seems kind of verbose. How do people feel about using JSTL
functions? I personally have really found them a good element in the
toolkit, but I haven't seen many open source projects include them
alongside
custom tags.
I think this below is mich nicer:
The p
Since the whole question about using JSTL tags in Tiles went off in a
different direction, I'll try again.
(No, I don't have a burning desire to force them into some open source
project -- but in the Tiles case, no one commented on the general question
and it went in a different direction.)
Anyw
I believe xwork and Struts 2 are set to always deploy sources. Copy the
relevant section out of the pom into the annotations jar if you want
sources for it as well.
Don
Joe Germuska wrote:
Great -- and I just verified that I am able to deploy, which I did, for
struts-annotations.
That leads
Great -- and I just verified that I am able to deploy, which I did, for
struts-annotations.
That leads me to a couple of small "practice" questions for the team.
First, I really like having source code in the maven repository, so that mvn
eclipse:eclipse -DdownloadSources=true can get them all a
Fixed.
Don
Joe Germuska wrote:
Hey, I just sent this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and when I went to build a new
snapshot of struts-annotations, I got a "permission denied"
Turns out the existing file is owned by mrdon:apcvs with 644 perms.
I think we need to make sure everyone who does deployments
Hey, I just sent this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and when I went to build a new
snapshot of struts-annotations, I got a "permission denied"
Turns out the existing file is owned by mrdon:apcvs with 644 perms.
I think we need to make sure everyone who does deployments adds permissions
configs to their
If no one minds, I'd like to go ahead and archive OverDrive, and then
use it as the base of another open source project under another name,
probably at Google Code.
My dayjob is moving to Dojo and JSON-RPC as our preferred UI. The code
we developed here works extremely well via JSON-RPC, and I th
Yes, I didn't upload the binaries for that reason.
-T.
On 1/12/07, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted,
I assume that JayRock is an optional add-on, and not built into Overdrive,
given that it's LGPL licensed?
--
Martin Cooper
On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
On 1/12/07, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think we should have more discussion before reverting anything, because
I
feel pretty strongly about naming, and I feel like what is there now is
substantially more clear than what was there before.
+1. Let's get on the same page before
Joe Germuska wrote:
Sorry, I suppose that was kind of hasty of me.
I urged you to do it too. . .the great thing about source control is
that we can always roll back :)
But I have to say that I
totally disagree that the behavior of the tiles:attribute tag as it is
written is defining anyt
Sorry, I suppose that was kind of hasty of me. But I have to say that I
totally disagree that the behavior of the tiles:attribute tag as it is
written is defining anything. It is causing content to appear in the page,
and therefore should have a name like insertXXX
I think there was some kind o
Ted,
I assume that JayRock is an optional add-on, and not built into Overdrive,
given that it's LGPL licensed?
--
Martin Cooper
On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Author: husted
Date: Fri Jan 12 07:19:29 2007
New Revision: 495597
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=
David H. DeWolf ha scritto:
2) rename tiles:put to tiles:putAttribute
I don't know, if you rename you should rename also the
element in the Tiles configuration file, they should be the same.
Antonio
-
To unsubscribe, e-ma
Greg Reddin ha scritto:
On 1/11/07, David H. DeWolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
have you tried:
Wow, I thought (from looking at the FAQ) that this defined a *new*
attribute, not inserted one already defined.
The "insert" and "define" verbs are both corrects because the tag
"inserts" (i
Antonio Petrelli ha scritto:
Hey hey wait I minute!
Too late :-) Hey Joe, why did you commit your ideas without asking the
author (i.e. me) about the names of those tags?
There was a discussion some time ago on Shale users list about naming
confusion (someone used attributes in non-layout pag
David H. DeWolf ha scritto:
BTW, I think what we though tiles:attribute would be, is actually
tiles:put and tiles:putList. You'd think that I'd remember that.
I'd propose we:
1) rename tiles:attribute to tiles:insertAttribute
2) rename tiles:put to tiles:putAttribute
Hey hey wait I minute!
17 matches
Mail list logo
