2005/7/2, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I would agree with Sean we make it a requirement for all sandbox > components to have documentation attached before they move out of the > sandbox, so as soon as this is done, move it in I would say!
***huch*** Does this in reverse mean that all components without documentation outside of sandbox should go there now?! :-) Ok, seriously: That's also my feeling. Having some docs and some testing is the minimum requirement for sandbox components to move out (or be voted out?). But we should not push too hard on the "how" and "how much". Common sense is enough, IMHO. BTW, we should define a bylaw that defines this procedure. Should we make "voting out" mandatory? -Manfred > > regards, > > Martin > > On 7/2/05, Grant Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sean, > > > > The inputSuggest component is great. I can confirm it works in Mozilla > > and Firefox. There seems to be a small issue with Konqueror (KDE) in > > that if you DOWN ARROW into the list, it just selects the first item, > > and you then lose the rest of the items. However, I suspect that this is > > just due to Konqueror's bad javascript interpreter with which I've had > > problems with in the past. > > > > So now the obvious question is: How long before we boot it out of the > > sandbox into Tomahawk ? I presume there is a prescribed testing / > > waiting period ? > > > > Thanks and congrats to Matt and Sean for the first sandbox component!! > > > > > > > > Sean Schofield wrote: > > > > >Grant, > > > > > >The autogenerated id's do not have ':' in them anyways. The clientId > > >has it but not the component id. In my case I was deriving the id of > > >some hidden fields based on the client id which was a mistake. If I > > >just derive off the component id everything is fine. > > > > > >sean > > > > > >ps. Thanks for looking into this. Give the new component a try if > > >you're interested. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
