Hi Will,
Well, we have used Velocity, in a generator application code for generating
J2EE code ...
And I can tell you that some velocity template are quite big enougth to
justify the use of a debugger ;-))
I have done a eclipse RCP application to wrap our generator core, and then I
asked me,
I wouldn't think you'd need JavaCC unless you are changing the syntax
of the template language. JavaCC was originally used to generate the
Node files, but after that they are hand-edited.
Will
On 1/30/07, bguedes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Will,
Well, we have used Velocity, in a generator
Overload Macros
---
Key: VELOCITY-510
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-510
Project: Velocity
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: Documentation, Engine
Reporter: Steve O'Hara
fix dependency list in jar-dependencies.xml
Key: VELOCITY-512
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-512
Project: Velocity
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Documentation
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Henning Schmiedehausen reassigned VELOCITY-512:
---
Assignee: Henning Schmiedehausen
fix dependency list in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-511?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Henning Schmiedehausen reassigned VELOCITY-511:
---
Assignee: Henning Schmiedehausen
add notes on jar upgrade to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-511?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Henning Schmiedehausen resolved VELOCITY-511.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Added an upgrading file to the site and a notice to
Hi all,
Reluctantly, I vote -1.
I tested the release. It compiled fine, ant test ran fine under JDK
1.5 and 1.6, worked with Velocity Tools 1.2. But when I checked all
the hyperlinks, the anakia page was missing. There's an error when
generating the page and it was left out of the
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 14:53 -0800, Will Glass-Husain wrote:
Hi all,
Reluctantly, I vote -1.
I tested the release. It compiled fine, ant test ran fine under JDK
1.5 and 1.6, worked with Velocity Tools 1.2. But when I checked all
the hyperlinks, the anakia page was missing. There's an
On 1/30/07, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Reluctantly, I vote -1.
:(
I tested the release. It compiled fine, ant test ran fine under JDK
1.5 and 1.6, worked with Velocity Tools 1.2. But when I checked all
the hyperlinks, the anakia page was missing. There's an error
On 1/30/07, Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
I did discuss this in some depth with Will on IRC. He explained me his
reasons for the vote in depth I respect them. Here is my response:
- The problem with the anakia.html file is apparent and obvious. So we
have a single file
On Jan 31, 2007, at 12:52 AM, Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 1/30/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 30, 2007, at 11:24 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
...
As a compromise, I'd like to propose to keep the 1.5 release and
call it
Release candidate in the same way as httpd
On Jan 31, 2007, at 1:52 AM, Will Glass-Husain wrote:
Hi,
Knew I'd be unpopular the moment I hit send.
You did the right thing. This is what the oversight processes here
at the ASF are about.
Three quick notes.
1) don't think the changes are big. But I think the distro should be
On Jan 31, 2007, at 3:48 AM, Will Glass-Husain wrote:
I thought about this a little more. There's a couple things we can do
that I'd support.
(1) Figure out a way to call this release something other than
Velocity 1.5, e.g. Velocity 1.5rc1 and issue the release immediately.
Can we do this
On 1/30/07, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Knew I'd be unpopular the moment I hit send.
no, no. we still like you. just not your decision. :)
Three quick notes.
1) don't think the changes are big. But I think the distro should be
reviewed and fixed. A bad hyperlink on
On 1/30/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2007, at 3:48 AM, Will Glass-Husain wrote:
I thought about this a little more. There's a couple things we can do
that I'd support.
(1) Figure out a way to call this release something other than
Velocity 1.5, e.g. Velocity
Just to clarify...
2) Unlike V-tools, we did not have a test build. Instead, the final
package was created with the choice vote yes, or delay the release.
no. we did have a test build and veltools did not.
test build == unreleased build to be tested then voted upon
What I meant is that
ok, there seems to be some confusion about the different ways to
prepare, label, and vote on releases. here's my understanding of the
two most common options.
1) How we used to do it.
We would put the quality/status of the release in the release
name. These would typically go something
18 matches
Mail list logo
