Janne,
You and I had the same thought. I suggest going with org.apache.JSPWiki, as
suggested by you in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-465?focusedCommentId=12660676#
action_12660676.
--- Noel
-
To
Hi Janne,
one of my favorite quotes - The problem with quick and dirty is that
dirty remains long after quick has been forgotten
+) when do you expect a JSPWiki 3.0 release to hit the public - I think
it will be a while ...
+) even when JSPWiki 3.0 is available only a few people will use it in
Hi all,
Noel J. Bergman schrieb:
Janne,
You and I had the same thought. I suggest going with org.apache.JSPWiki, as
suggested by you in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-465?focusedCommentId=12660676#
action_12660676.
I would not go that route, actually I agree with Harry
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Janne Jalkanen janne.jalka...@ecyrd.com wrote:
We've got some fairly hackish ways around this (which cause pain), so the
question to Incubator folks is - can we use a different package name than
org.apache.jspwiki for our project, or does it require a full
Hi ho folks!
We were preparing for a massive rename from our old jspwiki name
space to the org.apache.jspwiki.* -package to prepare for our first
Apache release when we hit a major snag.
Turns out that Jasper JSP compiler has a bug in it, and it thinks all
classes with their FQN starting
