Martijn Dashorst wrote:
I've tried to remove some issues from our previous round. The less
issues to cope with, the better.
- just one target directory still eludes me, the rest have been eliminated
- jetty jars are now provided, and not put in the examples war
- build artifacts now go into targe
Al thx for your investigation... you're welcome to fix anything in the
release branch. :)
Martijn
On 3/28/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> I've tried to remove some issues from our previous round. The less
> issues to cope with, the better.
> - just one target dir
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Al Maw wrote:
Other than that, things I've checked are:
- Tests all pass.
Hmm. I tried to run the tests, and some of them are failing because
the outputted markup has attributes in wrong order. Tests pass ok
when I use JDK 1.5.0, but with 1.4.2 or 1
This is a known issue and does not hold back the release.
Martijn
On 3/28/07, Janne Hietamäki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Al Maw wrote:
>
> Other than that, things I've checked are:
> - Tests all pass.
Hmm. I tried to run the tests, and some of them are failing
On 28/03/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't verify the ASC sigs, 'cos I don't have your public PGP key.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wicket/common/KEYS
/Gwyn
--
Download Wicket 1.2.5 now! - http://wicketframework.org
Yup, that's why I changed the subject.
Janne
On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:58 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
This is a known issue and does not hold back the release.
Martijn
On 3/28/07, Janne Hietamäki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Al Maw wrote:
>
> Other than that, thi
Johan Compagner wrote:
>
> ahh ok.
> But if you are already in the validator then you also don't really know
> about components
> so where do you do then the call to component.getRootModel()?
>
onAttach(). And, yes, i /could/ cut and paste that while loop, but i think
it's generally useful
Yeah, that's why I changed the subject..
On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:58 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
This is a known issue and does not hold back the release.
Martijn
On 3/28/07, Janne Hietamäki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Al Maw wrote:
>
> Other than that, things I
Depends on what is easier to fix. I'm certainly not for changing to a
less efficient implementation just for the sake of the unit tests, so
if the DiffUtil could be changed, that would be great. IMO, our unit
tests are too brittle anyway, so a diffutil that would be a little bit
smarter would be v
* Al Maw:
> I can't verify the ASC sigs, 'cos I don't have your public PGP key.
Have you tried this:
$ gpg --search-keys [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Jean-Baptiste Quenot
aka John Banana Qwerty
http://caraldi.com/jbq/
Sounds good to me. It would be cool if you could build in the time
zone difference calcs like I described here
http://chillenious.wordpress.com/2007/02/06/49/ (and like are
implemented in various classes of the datetime project). Personally,
I'd prefer such a datepicker to be in wicket-datetime o
can;'t we do a XML based equals?
Most of the time it is xml what we output. So why not do a xml bases compare
johan
On 3/28/07, Janne Hietamäki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Al Maw wrote:
>
> Other than that, things I've checked are:
> - Tests all pass.
Hmm. I
Having just run into a situation where I forgot to do an instanceof check on
PageExpiredException myself, I now agree that your interface is a good thing
to have.
Eelco
Jonathan Locke wrote:
>
>
> I agree in principle, but there's a flaw in this reasoning. All
> exceptions cannot
> be handle
Is this on the radar to be implemented in an upcoming version?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-18
Thanks
fwiw, i would love to see this too.
best,
jim
On 3/28/07, Joe Toth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is this on the radar to be implemented in an upcoming version?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-18
Thanks
15 matches
Mail list logo
