Re: Structs 2 feedback
Works for me. On 2/8/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Because I'm artistically challenged I got help from a friend of mine to get mockup done, check it out here: http://picasaweb.google.com/musachy/ that's an idea of what I had in mind. thanks Vlad! musachy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Structs 2 feedback
On 2/7/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 1. Arrived at the Struts homepage and Struts 2 almost looked dead. No activity since October and no news or release information. Adding some news every few weeks will help keep new comers from bailing. There is now a link to a browseable archive of User Mailing List to the top of the page, which is where a lot of the action happens :) Other than the same old, same old, there really hasn't been much news, except the XWork 2.0.0 release. I added a mention of that on a trial basis. But, I'm not sure if we want to announce other people's releases here or not. We've been creating test builds, but those were not ready for consumption by the general public, and citing them on the welcome page would be inappropriate. Happily, now that we have a stable XWork 2, the perpetual-beta state should change, and there will be more to announce! 2. Tried to download the release using the release navigation. Here I was presented with the fact that there was a 2.0.1 BETA, which is the latest development release. I spent the next while looking for the 2.0.0 release, figuring that was the last stable release. Couldn't find it obviously. The versioning currently looks to the outside to be a complete mess and it is very confusing and non standard. I would not release a patch version (major.minor.patch) until the major version is released. Therefore all the references to 2.0.1 through 2.0.6 are very confusing because these are not really final releases, but all BETAs. Plus, there is talk about 2.0.1 BETA and 2.0.4 and 2.0.6 and this is all quite confusing. I would probably fix the version into a standard alpha, beta, release candidate model. So, currently it would be something like 2.0.0-RC6 or the like working towards a final release of 2.0.0. There's a new FAQ, with a link from the release page. * http://struts.apache.org/kickstart.html#releases Much of this is driven by the need to track changes to the codebase as it is being developed, live and direct. We also do not keep internal versions or secret roadmaps. What's on the web site is our one and only copy of everything. In practice, we don't do "final" releases, because in an active development environment, nothing is ever really final. A particular set of bits may be good enough for public consumption, but we reserve the right to make backwardly compatible changes to a release series, and to use the simplest possible versioning system: straight milestones that also represent tags in the code repository. 3. The documentation for Struts 2 contains references to zero configuration and the web.xml configuration file also contains this stuff. There are also a number of references to all the annotations. These are not available in the 2.0.1BETA JAR files and therefore I had a hard time using them ;) I did find them in the nightly snapshots, which aren't functional. I would keep the documentation inline with the latest beta and not the latest nightly snapshot. Anyone who wants bleeding edge will be willing to look at the source to see new stuff or build the latest snapshot docs themselves. Once Struts 2 has a GA release, it will be archived on the site, along with all the others (Struts 1.35, Struts 1.2.9, et cetera, going all the way back to Struts 1.0). Then, the Struts 2 links will point that archive rather than the draft site. But, right now, it's a chicken and egg scenario. We haven't been publishing archives of betas on the web site, because, well, they're betas, and the full documentation for the beta is included in the download. Though, since most beta to end up being GA releases, perhaps we should start archiving the docs for a version as soon as it goes beta. In the meantime, what is on the site is the draft documentation for the nightly build, which will become the next milestone. Last week, that was Struts 2.0.5-DEV, and now it's Struts 2.0.6-DEV. Again, this is our one and only website. This is the site that we use to create the next release, and so it has to contain whatever we want the upcoming release to include. I wish we had the resources to maintain a second development site, but, AFAIK, everyone here is a volunteer, working in our unpaid, spare time. 4. The tutorials reference a hybrid of WebWork 2 configuration, classes, tags and files and Struts2 configuration and files. This would definitely be confusing for a newcomer. I would probably keep the tutorials using only struts2 configuration, classes, tags and files since that is what the latest beta release uses. I would in turn direct folks to the WebWork wiki for running WebWork 2 if they don't want to use the BETA release. We adopted the WebWork documentation, along with the codebase. Our intention has been to replace references to WebWork classes with the corresponding reference to Struts 2 classes. Do you mean hybrid of Struts 2 and XWork classes? If so, we really don't know what to do about that. We depend on XWork as a
Re: Structs 2 feedback
I've assigned some documentation issues to myself. I'm starting this weekend on a User Guide (blatantly copying the structure from Struts 1 where appropriate). The CRUD tutorial from WW has been on my todo list for a long time, I'll take care of it. Phil On 2/9/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 2/7/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1. Arrived at the Struts homepage and Struts 2 almost looked dead. No > activity since October and no news or release information. Adding some > news every few weeks will help keep new comers from bailing. There is now a link to a browseable archive of User Mailing List to the top of the page, which is where a lot of the action happens :) Other than the same old, same old, there really hasn't been much news, except the XWork 2.0.0 release. I added a mention of that on a trial basis. But, I'm not sure if we want to announce other people's releases here or not. We've been creating test builds, but those were not ready for consumption by the general public, and citing them on the welcome page would be inappropriate. Happily, now that we have a stable XWork 2, the perpetual-beta state should change, and there will be more to announce! > 2. Tried to download the release using the release navigation. Here I > was presented with the fact that there was a 2.0.1 BETA, which is the > latest development release. I spent the next while looking for the 2.0.0 > release, figuring that was the last stable release. Couldn't find it > obviously. The versioning currently looks to the outside to be a > complete mess and it is very confusing and non standard. I would not > release a patch version (major.minor.patch) until the major version is > released. Therefore all the references to 2.0.1 through 2.0.6 are very > confusing because these are not really final releases, but all BETAs. > Plus, there is talk about 2.0.1 BETA and 2.0.4 and 2.0.6 and this is all > quite confusing. I would probably fix the version into a standard alpha, > beta, release candidate model. So, currently it would be something like > 2.0.0-RC6 or the like working towards a final release of 2.0.0. There's a new FAQ, with a link from the release page. * http://struts.apache.org/kickstart.html#releases Much of this is driven by the need to track changes to the codebase as it is being developed, live and direct. We also do not keep internal versions or secret roadmaps. What's on the web site is our one and only copy of everything. In practice, we don't do "final" releases, because in an active development environment, nothing is ever really final. A particular set of bits may be good enough for public consumption, but we reserve the right to make backwardly compatible changes to a release series, and to use the simplest possible versioning system: straight milestones that also represent tags in the code repository. > > 3. The documentation for Struts 2 contains references to zero > configuration and the web.xml configuration file also contains this > stuff. There are also a number of references to all the annotations. > These are not available in the 2.0.1BETA JAR files and therefore I had a > hard time using them ;) I did find them in the nightly snapshots, which > aren't functional. I would keep the documentation inline with the latest > beta and not the latest nightly snapshot. Anyone who wants bleeding edge > will be willing to look at the source to see new stuff or build the > latest snapshot docs themselves. Once Struts 2 has a GA release, it will be archived on the site, along with all the others (Struts 1.35, Struts 1.2.9, et cetera, going all the way back to Struts 1.0). Then, the Struts 2 links will point that archive rather than the draft site. But, right now, it's a chicken and egg scenario. We haven't been publishing archives of betas on the web site, because, well, they're betas, and the full documentation for the beta is included in the download. Though, since most beta to end up being GA releases, perhaps we should start archiving the docs for a version as soon as it goes beta. In the meantime, what is on the site is the draft documentation for the nightly build, which will become the next milestone. Last week, that was Struts 2.0.5-DEV, and now it's Struts 2.0.6-DEV. Again, this is our one and only website. This is the site that we use to create the next release, and so it has to contain whatever we want the upcoming release to include. I wish we had the resources to maintain a second development site, but, AFAIK, everyone here is a volunteer, working in our unpaid, spare time. > 4. The tutorials reference a hybrid of WebWork 2 configuration, classes, > tags and files and Struts2 configuration and files. This would > definitely be confusing for a newcomer. I would probably keep the > tutorials using only struts2 configuration, classes, tags and files > since that is what the latest beta release uses. I would in turn direct > folks to the WebWork wiki for running
Re: Structs 2 feedback
Instead of complaining I will actually do something :). Let me know where you are going to set this up on the wiki so I can help you. regards musachy On 2/9/07, Philip Luppens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've assigned some documentation issues to myself. I'm starting this weekend on a User Guide (blatantly copying the structure from Struts 1 where appropriate). The CRUD tutorial from WW has been on my todo list for a long time, I'll take care of it. Phil On 2/9/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/7/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 1. Arrived at the Struts homepage and Struts 2 almost looked dead. No > > activity since October and no news or release information. Adding some > > news every few weeks will help keep new comers from bailing. > > There is now a link to a browseable archive of User Mailing List to > the top of the page, which is where a lot of the action happens :) > > Other than the same old, same old, there really hasn't been much news, > except the XWork 2.0.0 release. I added a mention of that on a trial > basis. But, I'm not sure if we want to announce other people's > releases here or not. > > We've been creating test builds, but those were not ready for > consumption by the general public, and citing them on the welcome page > would be inappropriate. Happily, now that we have a stable XWork 2, > the perpetual-beta state should change, and there will be more to > announce! > > > > 2. Tried to download the release using the release navigation. Here I > > was presented with the fact that there was a 2.0.1 BETA, which is the > > latest development release. I spent the next while looking for the 2.0.0 > > release, figuring that was the last stable release. Couldn't find it > > obviously. The versioning currently looks to the outside to be a > > complete mess and it is very confusing and non standard. I would not > > release a patch version (major.minor.patch) until the major version is > > released. Therefore all the references to 2.0.1 through 2.0.6 are very > > confusing because these are not really final releases, but all BETAs. > > Plus, there is talk about 2.0.1 BETA and 2.0.4 and 2.0.6 and this is all > > quite confusing. I would probably fix the version into a standard alpha, > > beta, release candidate model. So, currently it would be something like > > 2.0.0-RC6 or the like working towards a final release of 2.0.0. > > There's a new FAQ, with a link from the release page. > > * http://struts.apache.org/kickstart.html#releases > > Much of this is driven by the need to track changes to the codebase as > it is being developed, live and direct. We also do not keep internal > versions or secret roadmaps. What's on the web site is our one and > only copy of everything. > > In practice, we don't do "final" releases, because in an active > development environment, nothing is ever really final. A particular > set of bits may be good enough for public consumption, but we reserve > the right to make backwardly compatible changes to a release series, > and to use the simplest possible versioning system: straight > milestones that also represent tags in the code repository. > > > > > > 3. The documentation for Struts 2 contains references to zero > > configuration and the web.xml configuration file also contains this > > stuff. There are also a number of references to all the annotations. > > These are not available in the 2.0.1BETA JAR files and therefore I had a > > hard time using them ;) I did find them in the nightly snapshots, which > > aren't functional. I would keep the documentation inline with the latest > > beta and not the latest nightly snapshot. Anyone who wants bleeding edge > > will be willing to look at the source to see new stuff or build the > > latest snapshot docs themselves. > > Once Struts 2 has a GA release, it will be archived on the site, along > with all the others (Struts 1.35, Struts 1.2.9, et cetera, going all > the way back to Struts 1.0). Then, the Struts 2 links will point that > archive rather than the draft site. But, right now, it's a chicken and > egg scenario. > > We haven't been publishing archives of betas on the web site, because, > well, they're betas, and the full documentation for the beta is > included in the download. Though, since most beta to end up being GA > releases, perhaps we should start archiving the docs for a version as > soon as it goes beta. > > In the meantime, what is on the site is the draft documentation for > the nightly build, which will become the next milestone. Last week, > that was Struts 2.0.5-DEV, and now it's Struts 2.0.6-DEV. > > Again, this is our one and only website. This is the site that we use > to create the next release, and so it has to contain whatever we want > the upcoming release to include. I wish we had the resources to > maintain a second development site, but, AFAIK, everyone here is a > volunteer, working in our unpaid, spare time. > > > > 4. The tutorials reference
Re: Structs 2 feedback
Musachy, Sure, no problem. I'll contact you off-list. Thanks ! Cheers, Phil On 2/9/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Instead of complaining I will actually do something :). Let me know where you are going to set this up on the wiki so I can help you. regards musachy On 2/9/07, Philip Luppens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've assigned some documentation issues to myself. I'm starting this > weekend on a User Guide (blatantly copying the structure from Struts 1 > where appropriate). The CRUD tutorial from WW has been on my todo list > for a long time, I'll take care of it. > > Phil > > On 2/9/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2/7/07, Brian Pontarelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > 1. Arrived at the Struts homepage and Struts 2 almost looked dead. No > > > activity since October and no news or release information. Adding some > > > news every few weeks will help keep new comers from bailing. > > > > There is now a link to a browseable archive of User Mailing List to > > the top of the page, which is where a lot of the action happens :) > > > > Other than the same old, same old, there really hasn't been much news, > > except the XWork 2.0.0 release. I added a mention of that on a trial > > basis. But, I'm not sure if we want to announce other people's > > releases here or not. > > > > We've been creating test builds, but those were not ready for > > consumption by the general public, and citing them on the welcome page > > would be inappropriate. Happily, now that we have a stable XWork 2, > > the perpetual-beta state should change, and there will be more to > > announce! > > > > > > > 2. Tried to download the release using the release navigation. Here I > > > was presented with the fact that there was a 2.0.1 BETA, which is the > > > latest development release. I spent the next while looking for the > 2.0.0 > > > release, figuring that was the last stable release. Couldn't find it > > > obviously. The versioning currently looks to the outside to be a > > > complete mess and it is very confusing and non standard. I would not > > > release a patch version (major.minor.patch) until the major version is > > > released. Therefore all the references to 2.0.1 through 2.0.6 are very > > > confusing because these are not really final releases, but all BETAs. > > > Plus, there is talk about 2.0.1 BETA and 2.0.4 and 2.0.6 and this is > all > > > quite confusing. I would probably fix the version into a standard > alpha, > > > beta, release candidate model. So, currently it would be something > like > > > 2.0.0-RC6 or the like working towards a final release of 2.0.0. > > > > There's a new FAQ, with a link from the release page. > > > > * http://struts.apache.org/kickstart.html#releases > > > > Much of this is driven by the need to track changes to the codebase as > > it is being developed, live and direct. We also do not keep internal > > versions or secret roadmaps. What's on the web site is our one and > > only copy of everything. > > > > In practice, we don't do "final" releases, because in an active > > development environment, nothing is ever really final. A particular > > set of bits may be good enough for public consumption, but we reserve > > the right to make backwardly compatible changes to a release series, > > and to use the simplest possible versioning system: straight > > milestones that also represent tags in the code repository. > > > > > > > > > > 3. The documentation for Struts 2 contains references to zero > > > configuration and the web.xml configuration file also contains this > > > stuff. There are also a number of references to all the annotations. > > > These are not available in the 2.0.1BETA JAR files and therefore I had > a > > > hard time using them ;) I did find them in the nightly snapshots, > which > > > aren't functional. I would keep the documentation inline with the > latest > > > beta and not the latest nightly snapshot. Anyone who wants bleeding > edge > > > will be willing to look at the source to see new stuff or build the > > > latest snapshot docs themselves. > > > > Once Struts 2 has a GA release, it will be archived on the site, along > > with all the others (Struts 1.35, Struts 1.2.9, et cetera, going all > > the way back to Struts 1.0). Then, the Struts 2 links will point that > > archive rather than the draft site. But, right now, it's a chicken and > > egg scenario. > > > > We haven't been publishing archives of betas on the web site, because, > > well, they're betas, and the full documentation for the beta is > > included in the download. Though, since most beta to end up being GA > > releases, perhaps we should start archiving the docs for a version as > > soon as it goes beta. > > > > In the meantime, what is on the site is the draft documentation for > > the nightly build, which will become the next milestone. Last week, > > that was Struts 2.0.5-DEV, and now it's Struts 2.0.6-DEV. > > > > Again, this is our one and only we
Re: Structs 2 feedback
Again, this is our one and only website. This is the site that we use to create the next release, and so it has to contain whatever we want the upcoming release to include. I agree with that, but there is no reason why there should be a "Release Notes" on the home page, pointing to something that has not been released yet, or will probably never be released, like 2.0.6. musachy -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
Re: Structs 2 feedback
H... This is a tough one, but I would think that a version scheme change discussion might be in order. It might be fruitless, but I think that type of versioning is pretty rough. Plus, there are nearly zero docs anywhere about it, not just with Struts2, but also with the Tomcat and httpd. Plus, I could probably safely state that 95% or more of all OS projects use the other model for versioning. Oh, I don't know. Aside from HTTPD and Tomcat, it's also used by MySQL and many, many others. It's less noticeable once there's been a GA release, and the subsequent builds tends to go GA as well. In a few more years, I'd expect that this will become the dominant open source release system. The process is very straight-forward. Here's a paragraph from our bylaws: "After a proposed release is built, it must be tested and classified before being released to the general public. The proposed release may be assigned "Alpha", "Beta" or "General Availability" classifications by majority vote. Once a release is classified by the PMC Members, it may be distributed to the general public on behalf of the Foundation. Distributions may be reclassified or withdrawn by majority vote, but the release number may not be reused by another distribution." This is probably a religious thing and probably not worth going into too much just because some newcomer didn't like it ;) However, looking over all the projects I used during my last sizable project, looks 90% of them used the other approach. These are: asm, cobertura, easymock, junit, spring*, acegi, activation, google apis, axis, bluprints, cglib, commons* (I think), dom4j, jdom, freemarker, oro, java-net-commons, joda-time, log4j, lucene, xwork and a 2-3 others. So, as a Java developer heavily using OS, I seem to have a different perspective. BUT, I'm also intelligent enough not to make a huge deal out of it AND I'm not really in a position to do so. Just feedback from the outside looking in mostly. One more thing is that the versioning scheme doesn't appear to be followed because 2.0.2-2.0.6 aren't available for download in anything but a snapshot version. If the model is that all "releases" receive a version than these should be available to download unless what you are saying is that some test builds never get released and therefore those version numbers become effectively dead versions. Personally I try to avoid dead versions numbers whenever possible. All builds receive version numbers, but not all builds graduate to public releases. The versions aren't dead, they just didn't make it past a test build. We use these same numbers in the JIRA tickets and notes, so it would be hard to simply bypass versions. Even though the builds are make public, many people still test them with us, and we refer to something being fixed or changed in 2.0.3 or 2.0.4. Again, this is only noticeable because we haven't been able to issue a GA release yet (mainly because our key dependency, XWork, only cam out of beta itself in January). I think what I meant as dead is that you can't use them in production because they are not fully functional and tested. So, if I stumble across a 2.0.5 JAR floating about somewhere, I have no idea that 2.0.5 is actually broken to some degree because the version appears to be the 5th patch from the final release of 2.0. Again, I'm reading into this the versioning that I'm used to and that other projects use. That is where the main confusion comes from. Where on the other hand I stumble across a 2.0.0-beta5 JAR floating about, I immediately know that it is not production quality yet just from the naming. Anyways, just some observations about versioning in general I guess... -bp smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Structs 2 feedback
On 2/9/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Again, this is our one and only website. This is the site that we use > to create the next release, and so it has to contain whatever we want > the upcoming release to include. I agree with that, but there is no reason why there should be a "Release Notes" on the home page, pointing to something that has not been released yet, or will probably never be released, like 2.0.6. Once we have a GA "best available" release, it will be pointing to the archived documentation for the release, not the draft version, as it is now. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Test failures...
I'm seeing some test failures in Struts 2 head. It's difficult to tell what exactly is failing with all the log output. Should we disable test log output? Bob
Re: Test failures...
I believe Rene's last commit broke the select tag tests, some 23 in all. Rene? Don Bob Lee wrote: I'm seeing some test failures in Struts 2 head. It's difficult to tell what exactly is failing with all the log output. Should we disable test log output? Bob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I removed the dependency from core on the new API...
We can bring it back easily when we're ready to finish implementing it. Bob
Re: I removed the dependency from core on the new API...
Cool, just update the JIRA ticket with the current status and work. Also, don't forget to put the jira ticket id in the commit message. Thanks, Don Bob Lee wrote: We can bring it back easily when we're ready to finish implementing it. Bob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
archetype
Creating a project with the maven starter archetype: mvn archetype:create -DgroupId=tutorial -DartifactId=tutorial -DarchetypeGroupId=org.apache.struts -DarchetypeArtifactId=struts2-archetype-starter -DarchetypeVersion=2.0.3-SNAPSHOT -DremoteRepositories=http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository when I run: mvn jetty:run I'm getting: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/velocity/app/VelocityEngine The created project is no supposed to depend on velocity right? musachy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Branch 1.3.x and label head 1.4.0
There are STRUTS_1_3_BRANCH and trunk now. What does trunk represent? 1.4? Or something else? On 2/8/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Struts 1.3 has been branched: > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=505116 > Added: > struts/struts1/branches/STRUTS_1_3_BRANCH/ > - copied from r505115, struts/struts1/trunk/ Please do 1.3.x maintenance and production support on this branch. I or somebody else will be updating the POMs at HEAD to read 1.4.0-SNAPSHOT in the coming days. Thanks, Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Branch 1.3.x and label head 1.4.0
All the POM files in HEAD have been updated to 1.4.0-SNAPSHOT If you want to work on Struts 1.3, check out the STRUTS_1_3_BRANCH Michael Jouravlev wrote: There are STRUTS_1_3_BRANCH and trunk now. What does trunk represent? 1.4? Or something else? On 2/8/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Struts 1.3 has been branched: > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=505116 > Added: > struts/struts1/branches/STRUTS_1_3_BRANCH/ > - copied from r505115, struts/struts1/trunk/ Please do 1.3.x maintenance and production support on this branch. I or somebody else will be updating the POMs at HEAD to read 1.4.0-SNAPSHOT in the coming days. Thanks, Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ajax(dojo) + Safari Support?
Hey guys, Been actively playing around with the new build over the past week or two. I'm curious though if it's common knowledge that there appears to be issues with the dojo components and the mac safari browser? Using Musachy's great example http://cwiki.apache.org/S2WIKI/struts-2-spring-2-jpa-ajax.html All browsers on Mac Firefox v2.0.0.1..PASS! Safari v2.0.4..FAIL Along with the rendering of the Refresh container being broken and tags not working properly Safari throws a whole slew of errors in debug mode using Musachy's example: DEBUG: failed loading /quickstart/struts/dojo/src/__package__.js with error: [SyntaxError: Parse error] DEBUG: failed loading /quickstart/struts/dojo/src.js with error: [SyntaxError: Parse error] DEBUG: failed loading /quickstart/struts/dojo/__package__.js with error: [SyntaxError: Parse error] FATAL: Could not load 'dojo.event.common'; last tried '__package__.js' DEBUG: failed loading /quickstart/struts/dojo/src/event/__package__.js with error: [Error: Could not load 'dojo.event.common'; last tried '__package__.js'] DEBUG: DEPRECATED: dojo.event replaced by dojo.event.* -- will be removed in version: 0.5 FATAL: Could not load 'dojo.event.common'; last tried '__package__.js' DEBUG: failed loading /quickstart/struts/dojo/src/event/topic.js with error: [Error: Could not load 'dojo.event.common'; last tried '__package__.js'] FATAL: Could not load 'dojo.event.topic'; last tried '__package__.js' Any insight? Regards, Paul Saumets P.S don't know if my first email got through as I wasn't subscribed to the list yet but hopefully this one goes through. Look forward to being an active tester/feedback provider for the upcoming builds. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ajax(dojo) + Safari Support?
--- Paul Saumets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm curious though if it's common knowledge that > there appears to be issues with the dojo components > and the mac safari browser? Early Dojo support for Safari was kinda sketchy; it's better these days, but I guess you've found issues ;) File Dojo tickets against anything you find. Dave Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ajax(dojo) + Safari Support?
hah! Well why am I not surprised? bastard Safari! Could you point me in the right direction for where I can file tickets? I've only recently found this mailing listed and am not yet familiar where the core resources for testing reside on the web. :) Regards, Paul On 2/9/07, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- Paul Saumets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm curious though if it's common knowledge that > there appears to be issues with the dojo components > and the mac safari browser? Early Dojo support for Safari was kinda sketchy; it's better these days, but I guess you've found issues ;) File Dojo tickets against anything you find. Dave Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ./Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ajax(dojo) + Safari Support?
If you download Dojo you will find a "test" folder that has a lot of web pages with tests for their widgets. If they work, then it is an S2 problem, in which case I would have a perfectly valid excuse to buy a Mac :) regards musachy On 2/9/07, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- Paul Saumets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hah! Well why am I not surprised? bastard Safari! Yeah :/ Poor KHTML-ish browsers. Dojo's trac is at http://trac.dojotoolkit.org/ It might make sense to make sure that the problems are actually in dojo and not some weird S2 packaging issue or something not strictly dojo-related... I haven't really kept up w/ Safari compatability but searching their bug list might shed some light. d. Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
Re: Ajax(dojo) + Safari Support?
--- Paul Saumets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hah! Well why am I not surprised? bastard Safari! Yeah :/ Poor KHTML-ish browsers. Dojo's trac is at http://trac.dojotoolkit.org/ It might make sense to make sure that the problems are actually in dojo and not some weird S2 packaging issue or something not strictly dojo-related... I haven't really kept up w/ Safari compatability but searching their bug list might shed some light. d. Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[s2] JIRA cleanup
The webwork team (basically Phil and me) has begun an initiative to cleanup all the old 2.3+ WW JIRA issues. Any bugfixes will go into the 2.2.5 release, but all new features and improvements will be marked won't fix. 2.2.5 will probably be the very last WW release. Should we do the same for Struts2? If so, how do we go about it? Obviously there are a lot of old WW issues that aren't relevant to the new Struts 2 codebase. If no one else steps up to the plate, after we wrap up the WW JIRA cleanup and get 2.2.5 out the door, I would be happy to take the lead on this. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{VOTE] Struts Annotations 1.0.1 Quality
The Struts Annotations 1.0.1 test build is now available as a Maven artifact. It is a dependency of Struts 2.0.5. If you have had a chance to review the test build, please respond with a vote on its quality: [ ] Leave at test build [ ] Alpha [ ] Beta [ ] General Availability (GA) Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and more +1s than -1s. The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, longer upon request. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {VOTE] Struts Annotations 1.0.1 Quality
GA - it does what it should do Don Ted Husted wrote: The Struts Annotations 1.0.1 test build is now available as a Maven artifact. It is a dependency of Struts 2.0.5. If you have had a chance to review the test build, please respond with a vote on its quality: [ ] Leave at test build [ ] Alpha [ ] Beta [ ] General Availability (GA) Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and more +1s than -1s. The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, longer upon request. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {VOTE] Struts Annotations 1.0.1 Quality
GA - I've been keeping an eye on it and it is working fine. musachy On 2/9/07, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: GA - it does what it should do Don Ted Husted wrote: > The Struts Annotations 1.0.1 test build is now available as a Maven > artifact. It is a dependency of Struts 2.0.5. > > If you have had a chance to review the test build, please respond with > a vote on its quality: > > [ ] Leave at test build > [ ] Alpha > [ ] Beta > [ ] General Availability (GA) > > Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC > members are considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least > three binding +1s and more +1s than -1s. > > The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, longer upon request. > > -Ted. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
Re: {VOTE] Struts Annotations 1.0.1 Quality
Ted Husted wrote: [ ] Leave at test build [ ] Alpha [ ] Beta [ X ] General Availability (GA) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: archetype
On 2/9/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Creating a project with the maven starter archetype: mvn archetype:create -DgroupId=tutorial -DartifactId=tutorial -DarchetypeGroupId=org.apache.struts -DarchetypeArtifactId=struts2-archetype-starter -DarchetypeVersion=2.0.3-SNAPSHOT -DremoteRepositories=http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository I updated the starter archetype to use the released 2.0.5 jars, and deployed a new snapshot. Change to 2.0.5-SNAPSHOT in your command above, and try it again, mvn jetty:run worked for me. Is there a reason that Spring 1.2.8 is declared in the pom generated from the archetype, instead of letting the struts2-spring-plugin determine the version? -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: archetype
It is working now. Thanks Wendy! musachy On 2/9/07, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 2/9/07, Musachy Barroso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Creating a project with the maven starter archetype: > > mvn archetype:create -DgroupId=tutorial -DartifactId=tutorial > -DarchetypeGroupId=org.apache.struts > -DarchetypeArtifactId=struts2-archetype-starter > -DarchetypeVersion=2.0.3-SNAPSHOT > -DremoteRepositories= http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository I updated the starter archetype to use the released 2.0.5 jars, and deployed a new snapshot. Change to 2.0.5-SNAPSHOT in your command above, and try it again, mvn jetty:run worked for me. Is there a reason that Spring 1.2.8 is declared in the pom generated from the archetype, instead of letting the struts2-spring-plugin determine the version? -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
