Hey Jochen & others, I'm still not positively clear on what forced the change that caused TAP5-2482 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482> but I like your plan assuming we don't want to a do full revert. Would be great to get Howard's comment on it but looks like that's not going to happen now. Do you have any more details about it?
Kalle On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm inclined > to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had written > in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know > why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back. > > Kalle > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <palcso.bal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Kalle, >> >> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this change: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry >> testify tests started to fail due to this. >> >> Regards, >> Balazs >> >> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard >> had >> > changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id >> instead >> > of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open >> > issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change? >> > >> > Kalle >> > >> > >
