For portlet support, shared resource urls are served in a specific way (through
the servlet api, not the portlet api).
But because these might be component level resources, a portlet id is also encoded in their url to protect against potential url overlap when multiple instances
of the same port
ok so what are we going to do?
rebuild?
>From head or do you want to patch a branch? (ugh...)
Because if we make new one then also take the RequestContext fix with it.
johan
On 11/5/07, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 11/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > J
i don't care about this bug
The urls that could be generate wrong is still working fine. There is not
really a problem
It is just possible that the url didn't really reflect the resource on disk
But it didn't do that for a long time. So for me not a RC1 stopper what so
ever
The thing i fixed today
On 11/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Johan has fixed the code and the tests. However, he assured me that
> the test failure shouldn't cause problems in application code.
>
> I'm changing my vote to -1. I think shipping a release candidate with
> a test failure gives the wrong
Johan has fixed the code and the tests. However, he assured me that
the test failure shouldn't cause problems in application code.
I'm changing my vote to -1. I think shipping a release candidate with
a test failure gives the wrong impression. Though the failures don't
occur on most machines, I th
Ok sounds good. I think we should rebuild the release then. The problem is
just that I can't do it until Wednesday.
Johan can I get you to commit that thing to the release branch as well?
(under releases)
Frank
On Nov 5, 2007 11:47 PM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> This fixes th
This fixes the build on my machine.
Martijn
On 11/5/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: jcompagner
> Date: Mon Nov 5 14:41:00 2007
> New Revision: 592171
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=592171&view=rev
> Log:
> If the package resource was already loaded for the d
Hmm, thats weird. I have built on linux and as you know the
release.shrequires a mvn and mvn4 (
1.4). Så it should have been build and tested using the correct jre's.
Can anyone shed some light on this failing test? I can't (apparantly)
reproduce it.
Frank
On Nov 5, 2007 10:49 PM, Martijn Dashor
I've taken some time to test the release, but I get the following test
failure on OS X, Java 4:
[surefire] Running org.apache.wicket.markup.html.image.ImageTest
[surefire] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.037
sec FAILURE !!
So that would be a -1?
Martijn
On 11/5/07
I'll take a quick look (it's in my best interest too)
Martijn
On 11/5/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/28/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Makes sense. And I see it works now perfectly. Thanks!
>
On 11/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/28/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Makes sense. And I see it works now perfectly. Thanks!
>
> Actually, it doesn't seem to work for me.
>
> I have DiscountsPage and UserPanel. The UserPanel is added to the page
> wit
+0 (I don't have the time to test the release, but don't want to hold it back).
The release does have your signature, so that's cool (just need to
verify you are actually you).
Martijn
On 11/4/07, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have uploaded the artifacts to my p.a.o acco
wicketframework.org would not provide useful information but links to the
real websites... like opencompositing.org does :)
On Nov 5, 2007 3:58 PM, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Borges wrote:
> > I'd like to suggest to turn wicketframework.org into a front door for
> all
> > kind of W
Bruno Borges wrote:
I'd like to suggest to turn wicketframework.org into a front door for all
kind of Wicket information. Link to Wicket Stuff, tutorials, mailing list,
Apache's website, etc.
With all respect, I completely disagree with this suggestion. ;-)
We most certainly do not want to fra
i find this idea nice, too
Regards,
Korbinian
PS: if the cost of the domain is an issue, then dump me an email and ill
pay these bucks - 10 euro / year is not an issue regarding a great piece
of software IMHO...
Bruno Borges schrieb:
I'd like to suggest to turn wicketframework.org into a
I'd like to suggest to turn wicketframework.org into a front door for all
kind of Wicket information. Link to Wicket Stuff, tutorials, mailing list,
Apache's website, etc.
If you go to http://www.opencompositing.org/ you will see what I'm talking
about.
This website is about Compiz, Beryl and eve
Even so, it's better to have a RC-2 than Beta-6 :) (beta5 -> rc1)
The community trusts more on release candidates than betas. :D
On Nov 5, 2007 10:51 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> really, do you think?
> i am pretty confident that rc1 can be promoted to GA :)
>
> johan
>
>
>
>
On 11/5/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Okay, I might have overlooked the *or* part with implicates that empty
> element shorthand should not be used for non-empty elements.
>
> Still this leaves us with 3 options.
> a) ignore things silently and then support lot of weird bugreport o
See reply below.
On 11/5/07, Robert . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/5/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > It is true that in XML are equivalent.
>
>
> Just to be clear, I meant to write that and are
> equivalent in XML.
>
>
> However
> > > XHTML (at least 1.0) has some add
really, do you think?
i am pretty confident that rc1 can be promoted to GA :)
johan
On 11/5/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [x] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc1
>
> Yeah, go for it.
> It's a little bit disingenuous, because I'm sure we'll need an rc2
> before we get a final release out
Robert . wrote:
However, Internet explorer doesn't understand the application/xml
header, which means that we have to serve xhtml files with text/html.
And that makes firefox use the html parser, which considers an
open tag, even though it's not true.
Yes, IE does not understand application/xm
[x] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc1
Yeah, go for it.
It's a little bit disingenuous, because I'm sure we'll need an rc2
before we get a final release out, but hey. ;-)
Regards,
Al
On 11/5/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It is true that in XML are equivalent.
Just to be clear, I meant to write that and are
equivalent in XML.
However
> > XHTML (at least 1.0) has some additional rules you have to take into
> > account.
> > In this case the next rule appl
See reply below.
On 11/4/07, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matej Knopp wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that if you add empty tags to firefox, it treats it
> > like if you forgot to close it.
>
> There seem to be some misconceptions about what means in this
> thread.
> It is true that in X
[x] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc1
Ate
25 matches
Mail list logo
