Could this be also made for the gwt-incubator project? , i will also
be interested in nightly or at east monthly builds for both projects,
is good for people go wants to start using or testing the latest stuff
like the new event system or new widgets in the incubator
On Nov 21, 6:01 am, "nicolas
Committed at r4146
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:44 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LGTM
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/9656
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 05:54:37 2008
New Revision: 4146
Modified:
releases/1.6/samples/showcase/src/com/google/gwt/sample/showcase/client/ContentWidget.java
Log:
Use LazyPanel for deferred rendering in ShowCase
Modified:
releases/1.6/samples/showcase/src/com/google/g
That's a good question, and I has to ask around myself. Here is the best
explanation:
"In early versions of GWT, IsSerializable was the *only* way you could mark
a class as serializable by the RPC subsystem. The theory was that Java's
Serializable interface implied semantics that GWT simply could
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 07:28:31 2008
New Revision: 4147
Modified:
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/StandardCompilationResult.java
Log:
Typo fix.
Modified:
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/StandardCompilationRe
So is it an option to let IsSerializable extend the Serializable
marker interface?
On 21 Nov., 16:16, John LaBanca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's a good question, and I has to ask around myself. Here is the best
> explanation:
>
> "In early versions of GWT, IsSerializable was the *only* way
Clever. I don't see any reason that'd be bad... anybody else?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:38 AM, dflorey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So is it an option to let IsSerializable extend the Serializable
> marker interface?
>
> On 21 Nov., 16:16, John LaBanca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's a
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 07:53:38 2008
New Revision: 4148
Added:
trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/CompilePermsServer.java
- copied unchanged from r4145,
/releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/CompilePermsServer.java
trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gw
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 07:57:26 2008
New Revision: 4149
Modified:
releases/1.6/branch-info.txt
Log:
Recording merge 1.6 -> trunk.
Modified: releases/1.6/branch-info.txt
==
--- releases/1.6/bran
[google-web-toolkit] [EMAIL PROTECTED] commented on revision r4150.
Details are at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4150
Score: Positive
General Comment:
LGTM
Respond to these comments at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4150
--
You rece
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 08:02:01 2008
New Revision: 4150
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/theme/standard/public/gwt/standard/standard.css
Log:
less subtle highlight doesn't conflict w/today mark--use khaki background
instead of gray outlin
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 08:17:54 2008
New Revision: 4151
Added:
branches/1_6_datepicker/reference/code-museum/src/com/google/gwt/museum/client/defaultmuseum/VisualsForDatePicker.java
- copied, changed from r4146,
/branches/1_6_datepicker/reference/code-museum/src
[google-web-toolkit] [EMAIL PROTECTED] commented on revision r4151.
Details are at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4151
Score: Positive
General Comment:
LGTM
Respond to these comments at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4151
--
You rece
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 08:48:19 2008
New Revision: 4152
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/reference/code-museum/src/com/google/gwt/museum/SingleIssue.gwt.xml
Log:
Oops, broke this. Fixed now
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/reference/code-museum/src/com/google/gwt/m
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 08:54:23 2008
New Revision: 4153
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/DateBox.java
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/DatePicker.java
branches/1_6_datepicke
[google-web-toolkit] [EMAIL PROTECTED] commented on revision r4153.
Details are at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4153
Score: Positive
Respond to these comments at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4153
--
You received this message beca
Hey, Bob, I hope your trip back was pleasant. Can you review this patch for me?
What it does is do a better job with static fields. This was spurred
by a bug that occurs for static fields initialized to strings.
While fixing that, it was just as easy to improve static fields
in general. Static
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 09:12:50 2008
New Revision: 4154
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/DatePicker.java
Log:
reversed method order so date is always last field in preperation of adding
Date... arguments
Modified:
bra
but with OOPHM in 1.6, that is no longer necessary is it?
On Nov 20, 2008, at 3:20 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> Funny you should mention this.. we had a crazy plan once to embed
> the native libs into gwt-dev.jar, and at startup install them into
> the temp directory and then load them, with delet
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 09:26:43 2008
New Revision: 4155
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/CalendarView.java
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/DatePicker.java
branches/1_6_date
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 09:32:58 2008
New Revision: 4156
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/CalendarView.java
Log:
Fixing CalendarView formatting caused by eclipse refactor
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/go
I was not aware OOPHM was planned for 1.6, but in such case only jars
are required in maven repo. This will just require the maven plugin(s)
to upgrade and detect gwt version >= 1.6
Cheers,
Nicolas
On 21 nov, 18:19, Jason Essington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> but with OOPHM in 1.6, that is no
Oophm is not planned for 1.6
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:35 PM, nicolas.deloof
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> I was not aware OOPHM was planned for 1.6, but in such case only jars
> are required in maven repo. This will just require the maven plugin(s)
> to upgrade and detect gwt version >= 1.6
>
>
It would also require a patch to the maven plugin to allow it to
download and install the OOPHM browser plugins, otherwise, the 'clean
checkout test run' scenario won't work. So the plugins should be
bundled as a separate artifact in the repo, downloadable via a maven
plugin. A goal to launch a s
On 21 nov, 18:40, "Ray Cromwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would also require a patch to the maven plugin to allow it to
> download and install the OOPHM browser plugins, otherwise, the 'clean
> checkout test run' scenario won't work. So the plugins should be
> bundled as a separate artifa
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 10:08:42 2008
New Revision: 4157
Added:
javadoc/1.6/
Log:
place for 1.6 version of javadoc
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Ray Cromwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> It would also require a patch to the maven plugin to allow it to
> download and install the OOPHM browser plugins, otherwise, the 'clean
> checkout test run' scenario won't work. So the plugins should be
> bundled as a sepa
I'd like to share my thoughts on widget styling as I'm currently
trying to find an approach how to apply all required resources to a
widget to enable easy widget customization.
1. The CssResources are very powerfull but why do I have to write
a .css file?
I remembered my proposal from may (before
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 10:43:22 2008
New Revision: 4159
Modified:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/CalendarView.java
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/datepicker/client/DatePicker.java
branches/1_6_date
[google-web-toolkit] [EMAIL PROTECTED] commented on revision r4159.
Details are at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4159
Score: Negative
General Comment:
Think we should lose assertVisible(), not clear to me compiler can strip
it. Will try to remember to check/fix
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 10:57:01 2008
New Revision: 4160
Removed:
javadoc/1.6/com/
javadoc/1.6/resources/
Modified:
javadoc/1.6/allclasses-frame.html
javadoc/1.6/allclasses-noframe.html
javadoc/1.6/index-all.html
javadoc/1.6/overview-tree.html
Log:
Remo
It was me ;-)
On 21 Nov., 20:03, dflorey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm currently struggeling to apply a simple rule (just an example)
> like the following using CssResource:
>
> .headerTable td {
> font-size: 10px;
>
> }
>
> Before spending more time on this I'd like to know if the style name
I'm currently struggeling to apply a simple rule (just an example)
like the following using CssResource:
.headerTable td {
font-size: 10px;
}
Before spending more time on this I'd like to know if the style name
obfuscating might be the reason why this is not working properly (or
is it me??) ?
That's true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but for IE, it's just a matter
of regsrv32 with the ocx. I remember in the old days, installing an FF
plugin was as simple as copying a file. This is not really GWT
specific, more for the gwt-maven guys, but it would be nice if the
plugin could provision brows
No? I thought that was going to be the primary focus of 1.6 ... serves
me right for thinking :-(
-jason
On Nov 21, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Ray Ryan wrote:
> Oophm is not planned for 1.6
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:35 PM, nicolas.deloof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> I was not aware OOPHM was
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Jason Essington
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> No? I thought that was going to be the primary focus of 1.6 ... serves me
> right for thinking :-(
>
OOPHM will definitely not be in 1.6, and has never been planned for 1.6. To
be fair, it was planned for 2.0 when we th
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 13:35:42 2008
New Revision: 4162
Modified:
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/CompilationState.java
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/JdtCompiler.java
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/TypeO
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM, dflorey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. The CssResources are very powerfull but why do I have to write
> a .css file?
An early draft of CssResource with only class-based selectors used
Java annotations as the basis for providing the content of the rule.
It turne
Hey Shanjian :)
The patch mostly looks good, but running it, I got a failure in
test_predefinedFormat. This smells like a test that might only pass if
you're on the west coast; the result was off by three hours.
(here's the trace)
junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected=1:49:24 PM
Americ
I don't think it is a good idea to try and represent CSS stylesheet
rules as Java annotations. CSS is a DSL tuned for this specification,
Java annotations would be a poor substitute. The only gain would be
IDE type checking, but the downside would be the inability to have
non-Java people work on t
[google-web-toolkit] [EMAIL PROTECTED] commented on revision r4159.
Details are at
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4159
Score: Neutral
General Comment:
@rjrjr: If assertVisible is only reachable through assert statements, then
it will get pruned.
Respond to thes
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 14:18:11 2008
New Revision: 4163
Modified:
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/ExternalPermutationWorkerFactory.java
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/PermutationWorkerFactory.java
Log:
Implementation of PWF without the a
Ok, I'm convinced that my proposal using annotations would just make
sense for a very limited set of usecases.
But do you see a chance to include the CssResource styles into the
ImmutableResourceBundle, so that we can use something like a
CssStyleResource directly in ImmutrableResourceBundle.
It w
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 15:13:25 2008
New Revision: 4164
Modified:
releases/1.6/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/CheckBox.java
releases/1.6/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/HasValue.java
releases/1.6/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/TextBoxBase.jav
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:23:04 2008
New Revision: 4165
Added:
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/test/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/DateBoxTest.java
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/test/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/DatePickerTest.java
branches/1_6_datepicker/user/te
Hey, John.
This is not small, I'm afraid, but it's not outrageous either.
It's already committed to the 1_6_date_picker branch, and can be
reviewed there.
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=4165
>From the change log:
Makes DateBox implement ValueChange, and makes it, lik
46 matches
Mail list logo
