On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Igor Vaynberg >wrote:
>
> > * we need to have two different disk stores - one for ajax versions and
> one
> > for non-ajax. this is to ensure that the original rendered page instance
> is
> > not evicted if i
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Sven Meier wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> I seen these doubled renderings too, but didn't bother about it - until
> recently with a new component that changes on each render :(.
>
> We could add a new method #remove() to ART, but I'd be fine with 1) too.
>
No one needed
Hi Martin,
I seen these doubled renderings too, but didn't bother about it - until
recently with a new component that changes on each render :(.
We could add a new method #remove() to ART, but I'd be fine with 1) too.
Note that there might be other components *inside* the enclosure too,
that
Hi,
We found that using InlineEnclosure doesn't remove the controlling
component from the map with components to be re-rendered.
org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.AjaxEnclosureListener#onBeforeRespond adds
the InlineEnclosure to the ajax target and this leads to Ajax response like:
I.e. the
Martijn,
I guess you didn't see the commit and you assumed that I used :
Random.nextInt() to get port number.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Why do you think so ?
> By using "new Server(0)" Jetty will bind to a random and *unused* port.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9
Why do you think so ?
By using "new Server(0)" Jetty will bind to a random and *unused* port.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Which will fail randomly :-)
>
> though less frequently
>
> Martijn
>
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
> > With Martin's la
Actually it uses any *available* port, so the fail frequency should be
near zero ;).
Sven
On 08/05/2013 09:32 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Which will fail randomly :-)
though less frequently
Martijn
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
With Martin's last commit the HttpUnit ba
Which will fail randomly :-)
though less frequently
Martijn
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
> With Martin's last commit the HttpUnit based tests use a random port.
>
> Sven
>
>
> On 08/03/2013 12:45 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>
>> Should we do something to avoid that? Could
