Yaayy! Now, that I know the git command is right I put it to my favs. ;-) kind regards
Tobias > Am 28.05.2015 um 08:30 schrieb Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>: > > Seems to have been a delay ;-) > It's gone now. > > Martin Grigorov > Wicket Training and Consulting > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Tobias Soloschenko < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Okay - seems to be a bug. >> >> kind regards >> >> Tobias >> >>> Am 27.05.2015 um 22:12 schrieb Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>: >> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/repo?p=wicket.git;a=summary >>> doesn't list it. >>> We can ask Apache Infra team if it doesn't disappear soon. >>> >>> Martin Grigorov >>> Wicket Training and Consulting >>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov >>> >>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tobias Soloschenko < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I invoked (wicket-apache-origin is the apache wicket git repo - not the >>>> mirrored from github): >>>> >>>> git push wicket-apache-origin --delete WICKET-5819_Improvements >>>> >>>> the consolse shows: >>>> >>>> - [deleted] WICKET-5819_Improvements >>>> >>>> Branch still existis (at github) >>>> >>>> Something I made wrong? :-o >>>> >>>> kind regards >>>> >>>> Tobias >>>> >>>>> Am 26.05.15 um 08:24 schrieb Martin Grigorov: >>>>> >>>>> Sounds good! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Martin Grigorov >>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting >>>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Tobias Soloschenko < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi again, >>>>>> >>>>>> The only thing which is left to be done is to close the inputstream >> after >>>>>> the PartWriterCallback has finished writing. (Because it is not done >> via >>>>>> ResourceStream) >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> After that change and some tests / review the branch can be merged I >>>>>> think. >>>>>> >>>>>> kind regards >>>>>> >>>>>> Tobias >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 25.05.2015 um 22:05 schrieb Martin Grigorov <[email protected] >>> : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Tobias, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "readPartially" sounds to me like related to "Partial content, code >>>>>>> 206", >>>>>>> i.e. related to the functionality about ranges. >>>>>>> Maybe "readBuffered"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The change at >> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/repo?p=wicket.git;a=commitdiff;h=7e3fed6dce27d1cc5c68c7901eecec08091d59c4;hp=b3c9843f805560f6685106b97cd2f9ddab8c28a9 >>>>>> >>>>>>> is not very clear to me. Why it is needed exactly? >>>>>>> How the buffering leads to the need to not closing the resource >> stream? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've made some comments in GitHub about small things in the javadoc >>>>>>> improvements. Did you receive notifications? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Martin Grigorov >>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting >>>>>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Tobias Soloschenko < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I just want to introduce a new fluent method to PackageResource / >>>>>>>> PackageResourceReference which is called readPartially(boolean). It >>>>>>>> adresses a memory consumption issue while reading media files >> (audio, >>>>>>>> video) or other large resource files. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Before this implementation the content of each file shipped with a >>>>>>>> PackageResourceReference were copied into memory and then the part >> the >>>>>>>> client requested (Content-Range, Range, Accept-Range) was >> transfered to >>>>>>> the >>>>>> >>>>>>> client. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now only the part the client requested is read and transfered >> directly >>>>>>> to >>>>>> >>>>>>> the response, without storing it into memory (ByteArrayInputStream, >>>>>>> byte[]) >>>>>> >>>>>>> - For normal the PackageResourceReference is reading it from disk. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the method isn't invoked or invoked with false the old behavior >> is >>>>>>> used. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The only limitation is that no >>>>>>>> org.apache.wicket.resource.ITextResourceCompressor will be used if >> the >>>>>>> flag >>>>>> >>>>>>> is set to true, because the content will not be analyzed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I decided to first put it into a branch and discuss it here: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Branch: >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/wicket/compare/WICKET-5819_Improvements >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5819 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> kind regards >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tobias >>
