Dmitry,
I just applied your patch and recalled one more reason why I didn't apply
it when I looked at it the first time. The way the provider is loaded is
should be improved. I'll update your patch and commit the fix soon. Anyway
thank you for the patch.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Dmitry G
Forget to mention, the patch is against the trunk.
But I guess it should be easy to back port it to 5.3.2.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 17:47, Dmitry Gusev wrote:
> Igor,
>
> I've attached new patch with a test case. Can you look at it, please?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:30, Igor Drobiazko wrot
Igor,
I've attached new patch with a test case. Can you look at it, please?
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:30, Igor Drobiazko wrote:
> Well, I wouldn't say I don't care. As Kalle already said, if this is a
> blocker for you, you should draw committer's attention here on the list, if
> you feel that
Geoff Callender: 0 (non-binding)
I find TAP5-1911 embarrassing. If 5.3.4 is expected to fix it in a couple of
weeks then I'd vote +1, else -1.
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:12:23 -0300, Howard Lewis Ship
wrote:
Also, nothing prevents us from having a 5.3.4 as well I was quite
happy to let 5.3.3 accumulate more fixes until the bytecode bug
percolated up.
Talking about bytecode, what about copying the annotations from service
implem
Also, nothing prevents us from having a 5.3.4 as well I was quite
happy to let 5.3.3 accumulate more fixes until the bytecode bug
percolated up.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote:
> Just a bit of clarification here: Procedural votes like releases can't be
> vetoed. It's up
Just a bit of clarification here: Procedural votes like releases can't be
vetoed. It's up to the
release manager to decide.
Uli
On 18.04.2012 08:19, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
> Dmitry, I feel your pain but this doesn't seem to be a 5.3.3 specific
> issue. You really want to block 5.3.3 release becau
Well, I wouldn't say I don't care. As Kalle already said, if this is a
blocker for you, you should draw committer's attention here on the list, if
you feel that your issue is forgotten.
BTW did I mention already that providing tests in a patch increases the
probability of the patch to be applied?
Taha Hafeez: +1 (non-binding)
On Apr 18, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Igor Drobiazko wrote:
> Igor Drobiazko: +1 (binding)
Igor Drobiazko: +1 (binding)
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> I've created and uploaded a release of Tapestry 5.3.3, ready to be
> voted upon.
>
> The source, binary, and javadoc downloads are uploaded to:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~hlship/tapestry-releases/
>
> and
-1
Javascript onException call missing exception argument, almost impossible to
track what when wrong:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1873
Denis
On 18.4.2012, at 8:56, Dmitry Gusev wrote:
> Kalle, thanks for your reply.
>
> As I understood from Howard's report and release notes -
Kalle, thanks for your reply.
As I understood from Howard's report and release notes -- 5.3.3 is a bug
fix release, and what I suggested is just a small bugfix. I don't know if
there will be more bug fix releases in version 5.3, so I think this is the
best time to implement the fix.
I'm still rem
Emmanuel Demey: +1 (non-binding)
Demey Emmanuel
Le 18 avr. 2012 à 08:37, François Facon a écrit :
> François Facon: +1 (non-binding)
>
> Le 18 avril 2012 08:35, Massimo Lusetti a écrit :
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>
>>> I've created and uploaded a release
François Facon: +1 (non-binding)
Le 18 avril 2012 08:35, Massimo Lusetti a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
>> I've created and uploaded a release of Tapestry 5.3.3, ready to be
>> voted upon.
>
> Massimo Lusetti: +1 (non-binding)
>
> Cheers
> --
> Massimo
>
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> I've created and uploaded a release of Tapestry 5.3.3, ready to be
> voted upon.
Massimo Lusetti: +1 (non-binding)
Cheers
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
-
To
Dmitry, I feel your pain but this doesn't seem to be a 5.3.3 specific
issue. You really want to block 5.3.3 release because of this? It's
logged against 5.3.2 but it's not a regression, rather it affects the
core jpa implementation as a whole, right? I should have reacted to
it, my apologies. In th
Dmitry Gusev: -1 (non-binding)
I'd like to see this issue resolved in 5.3.3:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1848
This is a blocker for deploying Tap5 applications to GAE.
I've submitted a patch two months ago and I don't understand why its not
resolved yet.
I know Igor implemented JP
+1 Kalle Korhonen (non-binding)
We should also link to the release notes, 5.3.3 at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310833&version=12320045
My vote's tentative so far, I just run 5.3.3 against two of my current
projects so far without problems, will run more test
Thiago H. de Paula Figueredo: +1 (binding)
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
and instructor
Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda.
http://www.arsmachina.com.br
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship: +1 (binding)
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> I've created and uploaded a release of Tapestry 5.3.3, ready to be
> voted upon.
>
> The source, binary, and javadoc downloads are uploaded to:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~hlship/tapestry-releases/
>
I've created and uploaded a release of Tapestry 5.3.3, ready to be
voted upon.
The source, binary, and javadoc downloads are uploaded to:
http://people.apache.org/~hlship/tapestry-releases/
and the Maven artifacts staged to:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachetapestry-0
21 matches
Mail list logo
