Perhaps we might consider a new Maverick release using the net.sf.mav packaging. I'd also be happy to plug the remaining TODOs in the documentation, since I need to cover that ground myself anyway.
-Ted.
Mike Moulton wrote:
Welcome Ted :-)
Your FormProc enhancements, coupled with opt-formproc sound very promising. I look forward to using it.
Your packaging question is a good one, I don't think that has been discussed in the past. Traditionally all new code was packaged under 'org.infohazard.maverick' simply because that is mavericks package. However this has lead to consistency in the api as all current opt packages are 'org.infohazard.maverick.opt'.
What do you guys think?
Regardless, I think now might be a good time to define some guidelines for optional packages. Whatever comes from this thread I will note and write up a documentation amendment.
-- Mike
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 03:31 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
Thanks for the votes of support =:0)
I have a patch pending with FormProc now that I would like to include in our opt-formproc extension. I just left a note for Anthon Eden to see how he felt about it. FormProc caches the original input, and the patch exposes the list so controls can redisplay the erroneous input.
The other enhancement I'd like to make to FormProc, and our extension, is bidirectional converters. Right now, I can pass a converter a String like "12/31/2003" and get back a Date (or a validation message). To close the loop, I'd like to pass the converted a Data and get back "12/31/2003", without any additional coding.
One point I should bring up is the packaging. Since this is new development, I used net.sf.mav as the package root. I know some of you have looked the code over, but I wanted to make sure this was all right with everyone before committing it.
-Ted.
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf [INVALID FOOTER]
