You would move it here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/struts2/trunk/xwork/
Paul
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> we are all now in the same page right? (meaning we agree to move xwork
> under http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/struts2/trunk/)
>
> musachy
>
I am not sure myself, but I would think so.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Chris Pratt wrote:
> Since 2.2 is a new minor branch (not just a fix) are we allowed to rename
> the com.opensymphony.xwork packages to org apache.struts2? That would be a
> nice start towards full integration.
> (*Ch
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> * new documentation
I hate to volunteer anyone (ahem, *Bruce*), but since we are migrating
xwork over, it would be nice to pull some of the xwork docs over into
the new wiki. A few of the pieces here -
http://www.opensymphony.com/xwork/w
Since 2.2 is a new minor branch (not just a fix) are we allowed to rename
the com.opensymphony.xwork packages to org apache.struts2? That would be a
nice start towards full integration.
(*Chris*)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> What do you think should be the goals
What do you think should be the goals for a 2.2 release? I would say
* get xwork on its final location in svn and as part of the build process
* new documentation
* fix bugs
* UEL plugin moved to trunk
musachy
-
To unsubscribe,
+1, I think getting noobies used to seeing and using the more explicit
syntax would help get them up to speed much faster.
(*Chris*)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Dale Newfield wrote:
> Musachy Barroso wrote:
>
>> I think it would come handy an explanation of why some attributes are
>> exp
yeah I agree with that. it looks ugly but it is better, by far IMO.
musachy
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Dale Newfield wrote:
> Musachy Barroso wrote:
>>
>> I think it would come handy an explanation of why some attributes are
>> expected to be strings, while other are values, like:
>>
>>
Musachy Barroso wrote:
I think it would come handy an explanation of why some attributes are
expected to be strings, while other are values, like:
vs
I think in the tutorials, documentation, etc. we should use the %{}
syntax explicitly everyplace. If someone wants a string, for example,
The xwork module are core, plugins and showcase. It was only recently
that xwork was broken up and I think it was meant to make things more
manageable. Personally, my vote is for #2 as well. If we need to make
xwork-specific plugins or continue building the xwork showcase, then
we can move those ov
Well, I would like to hear from Rene or Rainer about #2
"2) (a) all of XWork, (b) just the XWork core, (c) some other subset of XWork"
To be honest I don't even know what the other stuff is(I vaguely
remember something about plugins for xwork), I think we should go with
b) just core.
On Fri, Jan
I think it would come handy an explanation of why some attributes are
expected to be strings, while other are values, like:
vs
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 8:48 AM, phillips1021 wrote:
>
> I've finished adding and making changes to the Using Tags tutorial. See:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/conflu
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> we are all now in the same page right? (meaning we agree to move xwork
> under http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/struts2/trunk/)
We don't have an answer to #2 yet (I saw opinions for both a and b),
but we have answers to #1 and #3, s
we are all now in the same page right? (meaning we agree to move xwork
under http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/struts2/trunk/)
musachy
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Musachy Barroso wrote:
> yes I meant under struts2, sorry for the confusion
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Martin Coop
incubator all the way
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:11 AM, Lukasz Lenart
wrote:
> Should it be voted or put in incubator?
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Lukasz
> Kapituła Javarsovia 2010
> http://javarsovia.pl
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Benjamin McCann (JIRA)
> Date: 2010/1/1
> Subj
I will take a look Bruce, I have been lurking for the last few weeks.
thanks
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 8:48 AM, phillips1021 wrote:
>
> I've finished adding and making changes to the Using Tags tutorial. See:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/S2NewDocDraft/Using+Tags
> http://cwiki.ap
and I thought I hated them :)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Philip Luppens
wrote:
> Oh yeah, trust me - already spend months cleaning up his .. the
> guy claims to be graduated law school, lives in Paris, and has his
> name and phone number on his website. I fired him a couple of emails,
Should it be voted or put in incubator?
Regards
--
Lukasz
Kapituła Javarsovia 2010
http://javarsovia.pl
-- Forwarded message --
From: Benjamin McCann (JIRA)
Date: 2010/1/1
Subject: [jira] Commented: (WW-2754) Source code for GXP result
To: iss...@struts.apache.org
[
htt
2010/1/9 phillips1021 :
>
> I've finished adding and making changes to the Using Tags tutorial. See:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/S2NewDocDraft/Using+Tags
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/S2NewDocDraft/Using+Tags
>
> I welcome feedback and would especially appreciate
Oh yeah, trust me - already spend months cleaning up his .. the
guy claims to be graduated law school, lives in Paris, and has his
name and phone number on his website. I fired him a couple of emails,
but I think he's literally too stupid to understand HTML, wikis and
communication as a whole.
The s2 hidden tag (and other input tags) does no escape html characters by
default as the property tag does. This can lead easily to XSS attacks if
you develop a stateless application in which the client is maintaining
state. Is there a good reason for this? I think a sensible default would be
to
20 matches
Mail list logo
