François Facon: +1 (non-binding)
we start the migration of our corporate mobile solution to 5.3.
Regards
2011/8/19 Taha Hafeez :
> Taha Hafeez: +1 (non-binding)
>
> We are already in the process of migrating one of our applications to 5.3+
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Thiago H. de Paula
Igor Drobiazko: +1 (binding)
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> It seems like we're ready to switch to a beta release.
--
Best regards,
Igor Drobiazko
http://tapestry5.de
Ulrich Stärk: +1 (binding)
On 18.08.2011 19:04, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> It seems like we're ready to switch to a beta release. This would
> indicate that we should shift focus from major disruptive changes
> towards filling in gaps and fixing bugs (and documenting) with the
> goal being a final
Bob Harner: +1 (non-binding)
On Aug 19, 2011 5:49 AM, "Ulrich Stärk" wrote:
> Ulrich Stärk: +1 (binding)
>
> On 18.08.2011 19:04, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>> It seems like we're ready to switch to a beta release. This would
>> indicate that we should shift focus from major disruptive changes
>> to
Ben Dotte: +1 (non-binding)
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Bob Harner wrote:
> Bob Harner: +1 (non-binding)
> On Aug 19, 2011 5:49 AM, "Ulrich Stärk" wrote:
> > Ulrich Stärk: +1 (binding)
> >
> > On 18.08.2011 19:04, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> >> It seems like we're ready to switch to a beta
Does anyone know why half of the built-in Tapestry 5 components that
take an "encoder" parameter are NOT set up to be able to use a
"contributed" ValueEncoder (that is, one configured with
contributeValueEncoderSource() in AppModule class)?
The following components nicely allow the "encoder" param
On Aug 19, 2011, at 8/198:56 PM , Bob Harner wrote:
> Does anyone know why half of the built-in Tapestry 5 components that
> take an "encoder" parameter are NOT set up to be able to use a
> "contributed" ValueEncoder (that is, one configured with
> contributeValueEncoderSource() in AppModule clas
