Moving to dev..... Well, not to be a pain about it, but the inability of some users to use a released product like Tomahawk shouldn't be driving the development decisions of a podling.
[After all, if you can use an apache podling, which may never materialize into an ASF product, then you should be able to use a "real" ASF project.] The need to have a popup calendar looks like a perfect trial run of merging the two code bases, and I'd hate to see someone go out and reinvent the popup calendar "wheel" yet another time when we've already got two or three of them. Realistically, merging the two is probably going to be more a matter of porting Tomahawk components over to Trinidad than the other way around, I'm guessing, so maybe I'm arguing over semantics. On 7/7/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey Mike, yes that is the goal. but for some reasons user's won't / can't use Tomahawk (or MyFaces) in their production. I think that was the reason for this thread. Creating a custom one on top of the Trinidad Podling is ok for me. For the tomahawk stuff, we should take a look at Dojo ([1]). On the ApacheCon I saw that they have now "xml namespaces", means <dojo:wiget ... /> instead of *hacking* JS. I know some projects, that are not allowed to use MyFaces; they stick with IBM or the RI. -Matthias [1] http://dojotoolkit.org/~dylan/dojo/tests/widget/demo_DatePicker.html On 7/7/06, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could someone refresh my memory? Was the eventual goal to merge > Trinidad and Tomahawk? > > If so, I think creating Yet Another Popup Calendar rather than making > the existing tomahawk popup calendars play nice with Trinidad is a > step in the wrong direction. > > However, I could be off-base on the eventual goal for these two libraries. > > On 7/7/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It would definitely be of interest! (IMO, it would need to > > handle internationalization and localization - I'd like to keep Trinidad > > consistent in this regard.) > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > On 7/7/06, Dan Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Just a quick prompt to see if there is interest in such a feature. We may > > > have capacity to contribute. I see this being rendered in 'inaccessible' > > > mode only, perhaps instead of the window'ed calendar - thoughts. > > > > > > On 6/29/06, Dan Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Thanks Ernst. We're really trying not to stray from Trinidad as a core > > > > library. However, I do like the look of the Tomahawk version, so that > > > would > > > > make a very good start. I guess I'm looking for guidance as to where > > > this > > > > would fit and how it would be configured - and indeed if people think > > > > Trinidad needs one! > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/29/06, Ernst Fastl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > There is a calendar with a JS-Popup mode in the tomahawk-component > > > > > library. > > > > > Take a look at: > > > > > http://www.irian.at/myfaces/calendar.jsf > > > > > Maybe you can use this one, or at least if you want to implement > > > > > something > > > > > similar in trinidad learn from this one. > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > > > Ernst > > > > > > > > > > On 6/29/06, Dan Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Would there be interest in a 3rd calendar mode whereby it popsup a > > > > > > JavaScript calendar, rather than just the inline and windowed > > > > > versions? > > > > > > > > > > > > If so, is there one out there that people would like to see as the > > > > > basis on > > > > > > which to build? > > > > > > > > > > > > Danny > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf futher stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
