[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
-removed redundant versions as well...
plugin
-groupIdorg.apache.myfaces.trinidadbuild/groupId
-artifactIdmaven-faces-plugin/artifactId
-version1.2.6-SNAPSHOT/version
+groupIdorg.apache.myfaces.buildtools/groupId
+
js centering bug in tr:panelPopup
-
Key: TRINIDAD-911
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-911
Project: MyFaces Trinidad
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Renzo Tomaselli
Hi, in method
I am using xmlns:trh=http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/html;
and also using xmlns:h=http://java.sun.com/jsf/html; in my
.jspx page. The html code written is working fine stand alone
in .html file but the same code not working in .jspx file.
Code for that is given below.
script
The attribute forceID=true is not working in included subwie
--
Key: MYFACES-1806
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1806
Project: MyFaces Core
Issue Type: Bug
Tomahawk's compatibility matrix [1] is out of date. Specifically the
Tomahawk 1.1.6 row and the MyFaces 1.2.0 column. I know MyFaces 1.2.1 is
in the works, so whomever updates the matrix could also add this column.
I am not sure of the compatibility data so did not update the table.
Paul
The attribute forceID=true is not working in included subviews
Key: MYFACES-1807
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1807
Project: MyFaces Core
Issue Type: Bug
On Jan 21, 2008 12:03 AM, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
-removed redundant versions as well...
plugin
-groupIdorg.apache.myfaces.trinidadbuild/groupId
-artifactIdmaven-faces-plugin/artifactId
-
ah, right :-)
sure!
On Jan 21, 2008 1:25 AM, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
well, now we can also wait for 1.2.1 release, right?
regards,
Martin
On 1/21/08, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
are there still some open items regarding the archetypes`?
If
+1
On Jan 20, 2008 12:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I would like to release Tobago 1.0.14,
The 1.0.x series has only maintenance focus.
This release contains only a few changes.
For a detail list please consult the release notes:
hrm...
yeah, well.
should we add this ?
I think yes. Even it is ugly.
-M
On Jan 20, 2008 11:52 PM, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep, notice-in-javadoc-jar needs to be fixed too.
The apache commons parent pom does it like this:
plugin
!--
- Copy
+1
On Jan 21, 2008 8:01 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
On Jan 20, 2008 12:10 PM, Bernd Bohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I would like to release Tobago 1.0.14,
The 1.0.x series has only maintenance focus.
This release contains only a few changes.
For a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOBAGO-539?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12561057#action_12561057
]
Helmut Swaczinna commented on TOBAGO-539:
-
I've been able to locate the cause of
No luck with that
can you give it a shot?
-M
On Jan 21, 2008 8:05 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hrm...
yeah, well.
should we add this ?
I think yes. Even it is ugly.
-M
On Jan 20, 2008 11:52 PM, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep,
-sunjsf12.version1.2_04-p02/sunjsf12.version
+sunjsf12.version1.2_07/sunjsf12.version
yes. that is more stable.
-M
facelets.version1.1.14/facelets.version
jetty.version6.1.7/jetty.version
common-io.version1.1/common-io.version
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further
On Jan 20, 2008 9:50 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
two questions.
1)
There is a 1.2.1 TAG:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/tags/1_2_1_RC/
that uses Trinidad's 1.2.6 plugins.
Why?
There was no release of that. Currently there is one on the vote (ends
perhaps this
1.2.2 vs. 1.2.1 should haven been discussed here on the mailing list.
opening a discussion after done some work is always not the best way :-(
-M
On Jan 21, 2008 12:18 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
In a discussion on dev list, I have noted this comment:
Yes, I agree with you
forget the work done at this time
My vote for a 1.2.1 release is +1 (two weeks is not a big time).
Any objections for release myfaces as 1.2.1?
On Jan 21, 2008 1:18 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the next logical step would be a 1.2.1, IMO.
we would confuse the people much more in just providing a 1.2.2 now, IMO.
I am pretty sure, that a 1.2.2 will even confuse our community a bit. So how
to
manage not confusing
I am not fighting to death for a 1.2.1 after 1.2.0 ;-)
I more care about that things like
what do we want 1.2.2 because issues with 1.2.1
are discussed on the mailing list, *before* putting a serious amount
of work to it.
Personally I think that a 1.2.2 is just a string ;-) but a little
bit
I don't agree. Tomcat skips versions occasionally with no ill
effects, and so does Struts.
(Occasionally someone asks what happened to x.x.x on the mailing
list but that's all.)
but the reason for skipping a version number would be discussed before on
the ml. I don't think that they do the
So we agree on 1.2.2?
If something was publicly released as 1.2.1 already, then -- even if
it was pulled -- please do not release 1.2.1 again.
Skipping a version number might cause some questions on the list.
However, reusing a version number will result in the end user not
knowing if they have the good version or the
On Jan 21, 2008 1:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If something was publicly released as 1.2.1 already, then -- even if
it was pulled -- please do not release 1.2.1 again.
it wasn't released. Just the impl jars made it to public repo.
which is (from the effect) close to a
On Jan 21, 2008 4:10 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 21, 2008 1:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If something was publicly released as 1.2.1 already, then -- even if
it was pulled -- please do not release 1.2.1 again.
it wasn't released. Just the
Because artifacts where published, even if that was not the intent, the
version number should be consider used.
Paul Spencer
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
On Jan 21, 2008 1:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If something was publicly released as 1.2.1 already, then -- even if
it
PPR error with XHTML JSPs
-
Key: TRINIDAD-912
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-912
Project: MyFaces Trinidad
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 1.2.5-core
Environment: Windows XP,
I am all for 1.2.2 - if someone downloaded the 1.2.1, he'll be confused -
releasing 1.2.2, we spare everyone the potential confusion. It is highly
normal to skip a point-release, that's really not a problem, I would think.
I thought that was already the outcome of the discussion on the dev-list,
as of now,
I am also fine with a 1.2.2;
but I really noticed not a common agreement on using 1.2.2
IMO the 1.2.1 would be updated, by maven.
(unless you run in offline mode, which is totally broken anyway)
-Matthias
On Jan 21, 2008 2:00 PM, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am all
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1805?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12561146#action_12561146
]
Martin Marinschek commented on MYFACES-1805:
Is this related to
after removing
?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1 ?
works
On Jan 21, 2008 2:03 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as of now,
I am also fine with a 1.2.2;
but I really noticed not a common agreement on using 1.2.2
IMO the 1.2.1 would be updated, by maven.
(unless you
Ok, so the general opinion now is 1.2.2, the community has decided.
whoops,
belongs to another email :)
On Jan 21, 2008 2:12 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
after removing
?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1 ?
works
On Jan 21, 2008 2:03 PM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as of now,
I am also fine with a 1.2.2;
but
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Leonardo Uribe resolved MYFACES-1781.
-
Resolution: Duplicate
Fix Version/s: 1.2.2
Issue duplicated (see MYFACES-1729)
I am all for 1.2.2 - if someone downloaded the 1.2.1, he'll be confused -
releasing 1.2.2, we spare everyone the potential confusion. It is highly
normal to skip a point-release, that's really not a problem, I would think.
I agree, +1 for 1.2.2
On Jan 22, 2008 12:20 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
34 matches
Mail list logo
