I'll do it tomorrow morning .
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe that the CSS trick was what caused issue ESME-231 :-) > > What we really need to do is make it so that we can put the snippets > in the right order in the HTML so that we don't have to do any crazy > tricks. As far as I can tell (again, have not looked at it carefully), > the bug is that the ordering of the HTML matters. That is usually a > no-no for exactly this reason. > > So, maybe we shouldn't close this issue, contrary to my last email. > I'll leave it open for now. Can you update with all the requirements > (correct ordering, footer works properly, and pool selection works > properly)? I would do it, but I'm on my way out the door. > > Thanks, > Ethan > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Richard Hirsch <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is a bug. The selector box has to be on the top of the page. I >> used a CSS trick to get it to stay there. >> >> Maybe you should revert back to the version before your initial change? >> >> D. >> >> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I've applied this patch minus the pubsubhubbub stuff that was in >>> there. It looks to me like it is working, though the streams selection >>> interface has moved to the bottom of the page now, so that may be >>> undesirable. >>> >>> I'm still not sure why the order matters here. Seems to me like a bug .... >>> >>> Ethan >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 8:35 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> That's what I did unknowingly! :) >>>> >>>> Imtiaz >>>> >>>> Imtiaz Ahmed H E >>>> Cell +91.98452 84561 >>>> Bangalore, India >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:29:07 >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> Reply-To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Stax deployment with new code - despite bugs >>>> >>>> Hi Imtiaz, >>>> >>>> My patch modified two files: style.css and streams.html. >>>> >>>> If you backed out the changes to streams.html only and left style.css >>>> as it was before, then I think we should be OK. I'll retest with the >>>> patch later today. >>>> >>>> Thanks for the patch! >>>> >>>> Ethan >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Let me elaborate... >>>>> >>>>> The last deployment on Stax without this bug according to Dick was on July >>>>> 12th. >>>>> >>>>> Ethan made a change and checked in 17th July which has caused this bug. >>>>> >>>>> I simply undid his checkin; re the revert to 942677 which is the 10th May >>>>> checkin. >>>>> >>>>> Reference: >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/esme/trunk/server/src/main/webapp/info_view/streams.html?view=log >>>>> >>>>> Imtiaz >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Imtiaz Ahmed H E" >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 1:14 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: Stax deployment with new code - despite bugs >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Find attached to the Jira autologically named file >>>>>> ESmeJira259PatchByRevertingTo_r942677_Reopens231Presumably.diff :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Somebody now needs to re-look at 231 :( >>>>>> >>>>>> Imtiaz >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hirsch" >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 12:35 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Stax deployment with new code - despite bugs >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The last stax deplyoment ( >>>>>> http://esmecloudserverapache.DickHirsch.staxapps.net) was on Jul 12, >>>>>> 2010. >>>>>> >>>>>> D. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In that case, it will help to locate the problem if you can tell me the >>>>>>> date >>>>>>> of that deployment so that I can check the subsequent check-ins to see >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> happened. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I myself will not be looking at the Stax deployment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Imtiaz >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hirsch" >>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 12:13 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Stax deployment with new code - despite bugs >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you take a look at the current deployment on stax, you will see >>>>>>>> that it works there. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> D. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dick, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Following your earlier mail saying you find new bugs on your return, >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> morning I started investigating ESME-259 and it doesn't look like it >>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>> working at any time. Not too sure. Still figuring it out. Will have it >>>>>>>>> done >>>>>>>>> asap. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Imtiaz >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hirsch" >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 10:04 AM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Stax deployment with new code - despite bugs >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As I work towards the next release, I've found a new bugs in the >>>>>>>>>> current source that don't exist on stax (For example, >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ESME-259). I'd still like to >>>>>>>>>> deploy it on stax. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have a problem with that? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> D. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
