I've found a bug in JavascriptValidatorTag.java.
(Nightly build 2004/02/23)
I use this tag in one of my jsp pages:
Now the JavascriptValidatorTag crashes with this error message:
javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: No form found under name null, locale de_CH
The error occurs on line 381. There is a nu
Hm. No one brought that up when we were talking about implementing
the fix, but that explains the old default behavior, which was to
render the javascript without wrapping script tags. That makes sense
when you're rending javascript for external use.
It seems to me that the solution would be
Original Message-
> From: Joe Germuska [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 02:03 PM
> To: 'Struts Developers List'
> Subject: Re: Bug in JavascriptValidatorTag
>
> Hm. No one brought that up when we were talking about implementing
> the
At 6:28 PM + 2/24/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Once a release is tagged that's it. We could retag and do 1.2.1,
however there will probably be other things that need to be fixed.
The point is to get 1.2.0 out the door and then see about making
whatever fixes that need to happen.
Well, if it's t
Yes, under the current process, there little reason to have a real "freeze". It's more
like a heads-up now.
AFAIC, the codebase should not be considered frozen now, and people can start applying
fixes to go into 1.2.1, including the license thing.
The only reason we're not starting a vote on th
Thanks for fixing that. But there is still a problem.
(Nightly Build 2004/02/25)
You can see the error in the struts-example web application.
There is a staticJavascript.jsp page with this content
<%@ page language="java" %>
<%-- set document type to Javascript (addresses a bug in Netscape
accord
At 7:23 PM +0100 2/25/04, Ralph Schaer wrote:
Thanks for fixing that. But there is still a problem.
(Nightly Build 2004/02/25)
You can see the error in the struts-example web application.
Hm. I don't believe that that's been changed in any of the last few revisions.
Please file this in Bugzilla;
this bug was introduced with revision 1.45 from 2004/02/04
in JavascriptValidatorTag.java
you find the working code in revision 1.44.
method renderJavascript.
StringBuffer results = new StringBuffer();
ModuleConfig config =
TagUtils.getInstance().getModuleConfig(pageContext);
At 9:08 PM +0100 2/25/04, Ralph Schaer wrote:
this bug was introduced with revision 1.45 from 2004/02/04
in JavascriptValidatorTag.java
OK; that makes sense. But that was when I was trying to get it to
throw an exception when there was no such form instead of just
spewing the static javascript i
I almost didn't read this thread, based on the subject line, but I'm
rather glad that I did, given how far the subject has strayed...
There is still a need for a freeze after tagging. While it's not quite as
essential as with our previous release process, it's still important.
Here's why.
The tag
So, at least as long as folks are happy with me as the RM, please allow me
the leeway of a short freeze period between tagging and releasing the
build, so that I can do the job as best I can. I don't think that should
be too onerous.
Fair enough: being RM is a lot of work, I'm sure, and we should
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Joe Germuska wrote:
> Perhaps this is understood, but I'm assuming that we also want to say
> that the RM "owns" the release tags for the release he or she is
> managing, and only the RM should *ever* move the tags?
It's never been stated as such, but that's not a bad idea at
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:54:49 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Joe Germuska wrote:
>
>
>> Perhaps this is understood, but I'm assuming that we also want to
>> say that the RM "owns" the release tags for the release he or she
>> is managing, and only the RM should *ever* move
Quoting Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Joe Germuska wrote:
>
> > Perhaps this is understood, but I'm assuming that we also want to say
> > that the RM "owns" the release tags for the release he or she is
> > managing, and only the RM should *ever* move the tags?
>
> It
14 matches
Mail list logo
