Andreas Ecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just did a grep through treevirtual and got 16 matches for the
> qx.ui.table namespace.
>
> I would also suggest to reconsider moving those parts out of the table
> namespace that are of some general interest to other widgets/parts of
> the system. Mayb
Howdy!
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 10:10 +0100, Til Schneider wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> > Sebastian Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Generally, before you start, I don't like the current structure because it
> >> mix widgets with other features. The original intention for the "
Hi Derrell!
> Sebastian et al, I can do the namespace reorganization of Table, but not the
> migration support for it. Let me know when you have time to work on the
> migration, and I'll get the reorganization done.
If the restructuring the table only involves renaming the existing
classes, a fe
naftali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> can we expect this in 0.7?
Sebastian et al, I can do the namespace reorganization of Table, but not the
migration support for it. Let me know when you have time to work on the
migration, and I'll get the reorganization done.
Cheers,
Derrell
> Derrell.Lipm
can we expect this in 0.7?
Derrell.Lipman wrote:
>
> "Hugh Gibson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become
>>> more so as additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems
>>> worthwhile to split up this single-level namespac
> Hi Til, good to hear from you! I guess maybe you've been drowning in work
> for a while and are finally coming up for a breath of air. :-)
Yes, you're right. I hab little time for a while for looking after the
qooxdoo list.
> I have no problem with that renaming. Additionally, there are now
Til Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
>> The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become more so
>> as additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems worthwhile to
>> split up this single-level namespace into an appropriate hierarchy.
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> Sebastian Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Generally, before you start, I don't like the current structure because it
>> mix widgets with other features. The original intention for the "ui" folder
>> was to contain widgets (only). The table use some special s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become more so as
> additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems worthwhile to split
> up this single-level namespace into an appropriate hierarchy.
I like your proposal for the restructuring. I wa
Hugh Gibson wrote:
>
> BTW, checkin 6124 looks pretty exciting ;-)
>
For people that like me don't know what checkin 6124 is, here is the
description:
Using the ResizeTableColumnModel, table column widths may now be specified
in the qooxdoo-standard way, using any of: number of pixels, percen
Sebastian Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Generally, before you start, I don't like the current structure because it
> mix widgets with other features. The original intention for the "ui" folder
> was to contain widgets (only). The table use some special stuff like models
> and a custom se
Generally, before you start, I don't like the current structure
because it mix widgets with other features. The original intention
for the "ui" folder was to contain widgets (only). The table use some
special stuff like models and a custom selection manager. Maybe we
can move the stuff whic
"Hugh Gibson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become
>> more so as additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems
>> worthwhile to split up this single-level namespace into an appropriate
>> hierarchy.
>
> As a user of the table
> The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become
> more so as additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems
> worthwhile to split up this single-level namespace into an appropriate
> hierarchy.
As a user of the table with a lot of success, I agree about this change.
The Table namespace is getting somewhat cluttered, and will become more so as
additional Data Cell Renderers are soon added. It seems worthwhile to split
up this single-level namespace into an appropriate hierarchy.
The current structure looks like this:
% tree table
table
|-- AbstractD
15 matches
Mail list logo
