Chisel Wright wrote:
Attempt #2 attached - I think it covers everything mentioned above.
Tests still pass.
Running the patch from the top level with -p 1 should work:
Nice one, applied with tiny changes as r10052.
Cheers
t0m
___
List:
Tomas Doran wrote:
Nice one, applied with tiny changes as r10052.
And shipped as 0.05.
Cheers
t0m
___
List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive:
Chisel Wright wrote:
I've attached three patches:
Nice work :)
For future, patches are possibly best from the top of the distribution,
so that you can just apply them from there without having to work out
where to cd into (for your patches, I had to cd lib, then patch, then cd
../t, then
Tomas Doran wrote:
Chisel Wright wrote:
- one for View::HTML::Template to deal with the Catalyst::Base warning
Committed as r10042.
And marcus has sent this to CPAN as 0.03.
Cheers
t0m
___
List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk
Listinfo:
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:45:09PM +0100, Tomas Doran wrote:
Chisel Wright wrote:
I've attached three patches:
Nice work :)
For future, patches are possibly best from the top of the distribution,
so that you can just apply them from there without having to work out
where to cd into
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:45:09PM +0100, Tomas Doran wrote:
You should just be able to remove the accessor module from the
inheritance here.
A lot of your changes change NEXT::foo = next::method. Do you really
mean that, or do you mean maybe::next::method? (especially the one where
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:09:17AM +0100, Chisel Wright wrote:
OK, I should be able to pick this up tonight. I'll drop a patch here
when I'm done.
I've attached three patches:
- one for the TestApp/Component/* issue
- one for Formbuilder::Action (it's not happy with
Class::Accessor::Fast)
