I think I have found a fix for the datascroller issue. Take a look at that.

2005/9/7, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> +1 If in this 24-48 hours period this bug has not been resolved, we
> can prepare the new release without the last patches...
> 
> Bruno
> 
> 2005/9/7, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > We can wait a day or two on the code freeze but IMO that means we
> > should hold off on new patches that might cause new bugs like the one
> > you're describing.  So my suggestion is to focus the next 24 - 48
> > hours on getting everything working again so we can branch.  Then the
> > JSR-127 stuff can continue on the HEAD.
> >
> > Can we agree on this plan of action?  Will someone let me know when we
> > reach this point?
> >
> > sean
> >
> >
> > On 9/7/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > +0.9 The code should be frozen once all the examples work. Now, there
> > > is a major bug (         MYFACES-528) that mail that dataTables, buffers,
> > > and some other components do not work ok, due to the resolution of
> > > MYFACES-509 (StateManager.saveSerializedView must throw an
> > > IllegalStateException when View contains duplicate IDs). We could
> > > build a release candidate but we cannot release without a solution to
> > > this bug. The other option is not to include the patches applied for
> > > MYFACES-509 (everything worked before, but we did not check for
> > > duplicated id's).
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Bruno
> > >
> > > 2005/9/7, Abrams, Howard A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Sean Schofield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 10:24 AM
> > > > > To: MyFaces Development
> > > > > Subject: Release decisions
> > > > >
> > > > > I just fixed an important stumbling block in the build script so now
> > > > > it should be possible to build a release *without* the sandbox stuff
> > > > > (and without the build crashing.)  There have been a lot of changes to
> > > > > the HEAD during the past week, so I'm not sure how we should proceed.
> > > > >
> > > > > My thinking is that we should rebuild the 1_0_10 tag/branch with the
> > > > > newest code and just heavily test.  I think there is too much stuff in
> > > > > the HEAD that we would want.  But at some point we need to freeze the
> > > > > 1.0.10 code.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I propose that I make a new 1.0.10 branch off the latest code and
> > > > > that we use that to build a release candidate.  Only the most
> > > > > important bugs (such as missing stuff from the release bundle) would
> > > > > then be addressed in 1.0.10.  Last minute requests for fixing specific
> > > > > bugs will be fixed on the trunk but they won't go into 1.0.10.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can I get a few +1's on that?
> > > > >
> > > > > sean
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 


-- 
Mathias

Reply via email to