Done.
-Matej
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Though I'm not pro on this change, I suggest putting it in before rc1.
> >
> > Why aren't you pro? Because
Nice to provide funds, but if we keep it, I'll donate the domain to
the ASF, which will take care of the registration fees. The ASF is now
the trademark holder, so it should be in control. However, we are in
control of the project that fills the trademark. So we can decide what
to do with the domai
On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Though I'm not pro on this change, I suggest putting it in before rc1.
Why aren't you pro? Because you don't agree with the idea, or because
it is too late in the game?
Eelco
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 19:28 +0100, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> The wicketframework.org domain is now pointing (through a redirect) to
> the wicket.apache.org website.
>
> The domain is still registered on my name, and I'm ready to let it go.
> The question is: should we keep the domain (register it
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Though I'm not pro on this change, I suggest putting it in before rc1.
>
> Why aren't you pro? Because you don't agree with the idea, or because
> it is too late in the game?
Ugh, n
On Nov 3, 2007 10:38 PM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Keep asking and Gerolf will fail his exams :-)
>
> I think he's looking for excuses to get his head out of the books.
>
nah, i've studied quite a bit today and i have 3 more full days to go
(although you're not completely wron
Though I'm not pro on this change, I suggest putting it in before rc1.
Martijn
On 11/3/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matej Knopp wrote:
> > Fixing this has practical benefits. And I haven't heard one argument
> > against it except that "wicket shouldn't do that because it's html". I
> >
On Nov 3, 2007 10:35 PM, Stefan Simik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is there implemented also effect chaining functionality ? In animator.jsit
> is,
> but in wicketstuff-animator project I can't see it .. but find it very
> practical and
> useful
>
you can add as many IStyleSubjects as you want
Keep asking and Gerolf will fail his exams :-)
I think he's looking for excuses to get his head out of the books.
Martijn
On 11/3/07, Stefan Simik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> fast response ;) really thx a lot
>
> I would like to ask one more question for wicketstuff-animator:
> Is there imple
fast response ;) really thx a lot
I would like to ask one more question for wicketstuff-animator:
Is there implemented also effect chaining functionality ? In animator.js it
is,
but in wicketstuff-animator project I can't see it .. but find it very
practical and
useful
--
View this message in
On 10/30/07, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [ ] Create beta5 on Sunday
> [ ] Create rc1 on Sunday
> [ ] Not yet!
>
The vote has ended and the result is that we will go for RC releases now.
BETA5 (0):
RC1 (8 binding, 0 non-binding):
Johan Compagner
Igor Vaynberg
Eelco Hillenius
Martij
thx, fix is in.
Gerolf
On Nov 3, 2007 8:19 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/3/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Gerolf Seitz wrote:
> > > 3) only redirect when the page-expired page is mounted:
> > > seems to be the best solution, because the (wicket) user cared
On 11/3/07, Al Maw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gerolf Seitz wrote:
> > 3) only redirect when the page-expired page is mounted:
> > seems to be the best solution, because the (wicket) user cared enough to
> > mount the page-expired page,
> > so the original url is probably disposable anyway.
>
> Th
I'd be OK with ditching it.
Eelco
On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The wicketframework.org domain is now pointing (through a redirect) to
> the wicket.apache.org website.
>
> The domain is still registered on my name, and I'm ready to let it go.
> The question is: should
The wicketframework.org domain is now pointing (through a redirect) to
the wicket.apache.org website.
The domain is still registered on my name, and I'm ready to let it go.
The question is: should we keep the domain (register it through the
ASF) or let it expire.
Expiration has the advantage that
now that's service
On 11/3/07, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> fixed, parameters are now doubles.
> thx for the report...
>
> Gerolf
>
> On Nov 3, 2007 6:41 PM, Stefan Simik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > I have a question about this method in Animator object:
> > withADSRTransi
fixed, parameters are now doubles.
thx for the report...
Gerolf
On Nov 3, 2007 6:41 PM, Stefan Simik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have a question about this method in Animator object:
> withADSRTransition(int attackEnd, int decayEnd, int suspendEnd, int
> sustainLevel)
> This method has i
I have a question about this method in Animator object:
withADSRTransition(int attackEnd, int decayEnd, int suspendEnd, int
sustainLevel)
This method has int numbers in parameters, but animator.js uses decimal
numbers.
Is it a bug, or is it ok ?
If OK, what's the mapping between <0.0 , 1.0>
Gerolf Seitz wrote:
3) only redirect when the page-expired page is mounted:
seems to be the best solution, because the (wicket) user cared enough to
mount the page-expired page,
so the original url is probably disposable anyway.
That sounds fairly sensible to me.
Regards,
Al
Johan++
-Matej
On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> w00t!
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
> Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta4 is released
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta4/
>
Matej Knopp wrote:
Fixing this has practical benefits. And I haven't heard one argument
against it except that "wicket shouldn't do that because it's html". I
have personally problems with such arguments. It just feels not
pragmatic.
We have three options here:
1. Fix the issue transparently f
On 11/3/07, Erik van Oosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Matej Knopp wrote:
> > I haven't heard a single argument against replacing with
> > except people being anxious of wicket touching the markup.
> >
> The best real argument I know is that I want the HLTM to be viewable
> without Wicket.
I
did that last night
On 11/2/07, Martin Grigorov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Let it be IClusterable. please.
>
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Author: ivaynberg
> > Date: Fri Nov 2 08:37:31 2007
> > New Revision: 591368
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=591368
w00t!
Martijn
--
Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta4 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta4/
Matej Knopp wrote:
I haven't heard a single argument against replacing with
except people being anxious of wicket touching the markup.
The best real argument I know is that I want the HLTM to be viewable
without Wicket.
Of course it is fine to have Wicket provide optional behaviour to
'
25 matches
Mail list logo
