ÐÑоизводÑÑво и поÑÑавка: меÑизÑ, кÑепеж,
канаÑÑ, пÑоволока, ÑлекÑÑодÑ, ÑеÑка,
калибÑованнÑй пÑокаÑ, кÑÑг, ÑеÑÑигÑанник,
канаÑÑ ÑÑалÑнÑе, ÐºÐ°Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¾ÑинкованнÑй, канаÑ
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Dave Newton wrote:
> Would it make sense to have the S2 archetypes in with... S2, thus versioned
> along with S2?
We've discussed this before, it should be in the archives. It's
possible, but it puts additional work on the release manager.
The poms for the proj
I'm no Maven expert, but I have found myself confused from time to
time because when building struts2 + plugins, etc. Once in a while
I'll wonder about a dependency, only to remember that I have to go up
a level or two to find things in either maven or sandbox. I always
assumed there was a Maven-y
Would it make sense to have the S2 archetypes in with... S2, thus
versioned along with S2?
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org
Vinny wrote:
I'd like to help test this. Where can I check this out from and play?
The struts maven tree, um...
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/struts/maven/trunk/struts2-archetype-blank/
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-uns
I'm All for it.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> lol...I am +1 too.
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:15 AM, James Holmes
> wrote:
> > +2
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Wes Wannemacher
> wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone have any objection to us moving the JSON resul
I'd like to help test this. Where can I check this out from and play?
Thanks,
Vinny
The future is here. It's just not widely distributed yet.
-William Gibson
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Dave Newton wrote:
> Wendy Smoak wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Dave Newton
>> wrote:
>>
lol...I am +1 too.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:15 AM, James Holmes wrote:
> +2
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Wes Wannemacher wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have any objection to us moving the JSON result type into
>> core? It seems to me that it is a good candidate for a core result
>> type and
+2
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Wes Wannemacher wrote:
> Does anyone have any objection to us moving the JSON result type into
> core? It seems to me that it is a good candidate for a core result
> type and I think it would also show that we are striving to provide
> AJAX support. The main
Does anyone have any objection to us moving the JSON result type into
core? It seems to me that it is a good candidate for a core result
type and I think it would also show that we are striving to provide
AJAX support. The main motivation for me is that if I wanted to begin
work on another AJAX plu
10 matches
Mail list logo
