OK, here's what we have
I would say release, we are using a x.y.z numbering scheme.
Noteing in the limited release that this should be considered an Alpha
until further testing says otherwise. Also to ask others not to announce this on other lists
until it has been voted Beta/GA or better.
I believe Joe said though all unit test ran they **didn't** all pass, I believe it was like 66%
passed.
As an aside on the unit tests, I pulled all other Struts releases CVS, 1.1 Beta 2, RC 1, RC2
and ran our current unit tests against the source and they all failed at some point.
That was using the same version of cactus used to test 1.2.0
-Rob
* Release notes updated * Issues w/o solutions marked LATER * Webapps tested on TC 4.1 (one issue) * JUnit tests run
In the Validator example, we're suppose to be able to change selected validations for a county just by overriding a form in a formset. This doesn't work unless you respecify the entire formset. I fixed the example, but we should decide if this is suppose to be a supported feature or not.
Here's what we don't have
* Webapps tests on TC 3.3a (next) * Patches/fixes applied for 11 issues <http://tinyurl.com/ysx3x> * Cactus tests run (under Ant)
I can't get Cactus running under Ant either, though Joe says they run under Maven.
If the Cactus tests are truly broken under Ant:
Do we want to call that a showstopper?
If so, do we want to workaround that by taking the Cactus tests out of the buildfile for now, as we are moving to Maven anyway, and have Joe apply his Maven-Cactus patch.
I could apply the patches sometime this week, but I'm leary of doing so when I can't get the Cactus tests to run on my own.
If we resolve the Cactus thing quickly, do we want to release what we have as 1.2.0 (w/o the 11 patches), with the intention of rolling 1.2.1 in January, or wait and do this after Christmas?
-Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
