Nicola wrote:
>
> I'm happy that we found this solution: from a problem we created an
> opportunity, and this is good :-)
>
Yes indeed.
Nice work, guys!
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
From: "Morrison, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Seperate the contrib/optional stuff from core?
> Nicola: it looks like everyone (so far ;) is in favour of
> seperating this. I know you were/are looking at doing it; how
> far have you got?
I'm halfway through the samples, but haven't moved any cla
al area/cvs (was: RE: POI
> Serialization code committed)
>
>
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> >I agree with Carsten:
> >
> >+1 (seperate the contrib/optional stuff from core?)
> >-1 (Should it be located in a seperate cvs?)
> >
> Same here :
> +1
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>I agree with Carsten:
>
>+1 (seperate the contrib/optional stuff from core?)
>-1 (Should it be located in a seperate cvs?)
>
Same here :
+1 for separation of contrib/optional stuff
-1 for a separate CVS. The amount of code doesn't justify it and it
would decrease its vis
March 12, 2002 11:11 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: [VOTE] Seperate Contrib/optional area/cvs (was: RE: POI
> > Serialization code committed)
> >
> >
> > OK, lets split this thread.
> >
> > Should we seperate the contrib/option
>>
>>Cocoon is becoming overcrowded with optional components, and this is a
fact.
>>For this, I think that we need a contrib section, which is optimal for
>>Cocoon IMHO. In the near future it will be the famous "Cocoon Blocks"
>>section.
>>
>>I'm +1 for this. I'm refactoring examples in this dire
> -Original Message-
> From: Morrison, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:11 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: [VOTE] Seperate Contrib/optional area/cvs (was: RE: POI
> Serialization code committed)
>
>
> OK, l
From: "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> >I understand that this XML conversion stuff is not a thing that only
Cocoon
> >needs, but this can be said also to of cocoon contributions.
> >
> >All Cocoon Generators, Serializers and Transformers could be used out of
>
Quoting Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> giacomo wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >
> >>giacomo wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>>
> giacomo wrote:
>
> >As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments
> which
From: "Morrison, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Should we seperate the contrib/optional stuff from core?
>
> +1
+1
> Should it be located in a seperate cvs?
>
> +1
+1
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get for
OK, lets split this thread.
Should we seperate the contrib/optional stuff from core?
+1
Should it be located in a seperate cvs?
+1
J.
> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >From: "Steven Noels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Andy wrote:
> >>>Steven wrote:
>
giacomo wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>>giacomo wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>>
giacomo wrote:
>As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
>convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>From: "Steven Noels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>Andy wrote:
>>
>>>Steven wrote:
>>>
So I am all unofficial +1 for having a separate module for Cocoon
contributions, where we can add the POI integration work, if enough
people step up as a maintainer.
>>>+1
From: "Steven Noels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Andy wrote:
>
> > Steven wrote:
> >
> > > So I am all unofficial +1 for having a separate module for Cocoon
> > > contributions, where we can add the POI integration work, if enough
> > > people step up as a maintainer.
> >
> > +1 if there are enough to
acoliver wrote:
>>Ok. Strict and precise mode on. I usually prefer friendly discussions
>>that lead to a consensus, but let's adapt to the POI way.
>>
>
>Perhaps your not aware of it. Your tone doesn't come off that way.
>
This discussion didn't start in a friendly way, so this isn't my usual
Andy wrote:
> Steven wrote:
>
>
> > So I am all unofficial +1 for having a separate module for Cocoon
> > contributions, where we can add the POI integration work, if enough
> > people step up as a maintainer.
>
> +1 if there are enough to justify it.
>
I hope the remainder of my arguments are n
I'll maintain the poi serialization code ... I just need access.
>
> > So I am all unofficial +1 for having a separate module for Cocoon
> > contributions, where we can add the POI integration work, if enough
> > people step up as a maintainer.
>
>+1 if there are enough to justify it.
>
>(person
> So I am all unofficial +1 for having a separate module for Cocoon
> contributions, where we can add the POI integration work, if enough
> people step up as a maintainer.
+1 if there are enough to justify it.
(personally I think more and better organized documentation for Cocoon is an
even be
Ken, or was it Nicola wrote: ;-)
(me just pretending to be the open source antropologist looking into
this from the sideline)
(asbesto suit activated - fire at will)
> The only logical solution I see now (correct or enhance this
> point at will),
> is that the elementprocessor code seems to b
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> giacomo wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >
> >>giacomo wrote:
> >>
> >>>As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
> >>>convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and only
> >>>leave the
acoliver wrote:
>>For people on poi-dev who don't know what this is all about (BTW
>>congrats for your nomination as a POI committer, Ken), let's summarize
>>by saying that I was very surprised by seeing more than 100 classes
>>added in Cocoon's CVS for the HSSF serializer. The Cocoon team vot
Just as clarification, as the author of most of the classes under
discussion: the classes do NOT model a spreadsheet. Each of the element
processor classes is reponsible for understanding its corresponding XML
element and for creating the relevant part of the spreadsheet that is being
construc
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>From: "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>giacomo wrote:
>>
>>>We have to see where the other code will best fit into other project (if
>>>the POI team cannot be convinced to hold it in their CVS).
>>>
>>We should do our best to convince them that XML support in PO
>>Any comments from the POI side?
>>
> Not up to now. And this makes me wonder even more about the support of
> these 100+ classes... I'm gonna bring this discussion to poi-dev.
Gosh,
> one more mailing list :(
I responded directly to that which asked for my comments. I felt the
conversation had
From: "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>One of their objectives seems to keep the library as small as possible.
> >>To achieve this, they could package the XML stuff in a separate jar
> >>(poi-xml.jar) so that people can use only poi.jar if they don't care
> >>about XML.
> >
> >Seems a val
giacomo wrote:
>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>>giacomo wrote:
>>
>>>As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
>>>convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and only
>>>leave the serializer and Avalon component glue code in Cocoon's CVS.
>
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> giacomo wrote:
>
> >As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
> >convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and only
> >leave the serializer and Avalon component glue code in Cocoon's CVS.
> >
> Thanks, Giacom
From: "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> giacomo wrote:
> >We have to see where the other code will best fit into other project (if
> >the POI team cannot be convinced to hold it in their CVS).
> >
> We should do our best to convince them that XML support in POI is a good
> thing for the proj
From: "Sylvain Wallez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> giacomo wrote:
> >We have to see where the other code will best fit into other project (if
> >the POI team cannot be convinced to hold it in their CVS).
> >
> We should do our best to convince them that XML support in POI is a good
> thing for the proj
giacomo wrote:
>As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
>convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and only
>leave the serializer and Avalon component glue code in Cocoon's CVS.
>
Thanks, Giacomo. I value your judgment as you are one of the Cocoon
"
Do we have sufficient code &/ reason for a separate
Cocoon-contrib cvs?
J.
> -Original Message-
> From: giacomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, 07 March 2002 10:06 pm
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: POI Serialization code committed
>
>
>
&
As always when Sylvain gets engadged he has very good arguments which
convinced me to support moving thoes classes out of Cocoon and only
leave the serializer and Avalon component glue code in Cocoon's CVS.
We have to see where the other code will best fit into other project (if
the POI team can
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>
>> This comes to me as a surprise; AFAIK it was unanimously voted upon
>> like 2
>> months ago.
>>
> What was voted in january was (taken back from the archives) "Would you
> like the cocoon-specific POI code to be hosted in the Cocoon CVS and
> shipped with the next di
> > The scope of POI seeks to be really small and focused: Java
> ports of OLE 2
> >Compound Document based file formats. We have no XML classes nor do I
> >really want any there.
> >
> XML is now a dominant technology in the software arena, because it moves
> software development from sequential
acoliver wrote:
>>That's really cool stuff, however I have some wonders about the source
>>code that's been added to the Cocoon CVS :
>>
>
>This comes to me as a surprise; AFAIK it was unanimously voted upon like 2
>months ago.
>
What was voted in january was (taken back from the archives) "Would
> That's really cool stuff, however I have some wonders about the source
> code that's been added to the Cocoon CVS :
This comes to me as a surprise; AFAIK it was unanimously voted upon like 2
months ago.
The package names were cross referenced with the location in the previous
CVS. The only thi
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>POI stuff committed with samples.
>
>:-)
>
>Please cross check.
>
That's really cool stuff, however I have some wonders about the source
code that's been added to the Cocoon CVS :
- shouldn't all the ElementProcessor stuff be better located in the POI
CVS repository ?
On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 16:18, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> http://localhost/cocoon/samples/poi/hypothetical-sales.xls:
> I think this one have alignment bug. B1 shows "DOSDOS", and A15 shows
> "Totals:Totals:Totals:...". Changing alignment of the A15 and B1 to the
> "right" fixes the bug. :-/
Fixed
Appologies to those who get this twice.
>> Can you be a bit more specific? Is this something other than the
>alignment
>> bug?
>
>I'm not aware of POI bug list... Here are my observations:
>
you can access it here if you like:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?product=POI
>http:
> From: acoliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> >> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>
> >> POI stuff committed with samples.
> >>
> >> :-)
> >>
> >> Please cross check.
>
> > Wow. Looks cool! However, some examples behave *very* strange with
> > Office XP...
> >
> > Vadim
>
POI::HSSF 1.x does not support formulas as of yet. This development is in
the works. The serializer currently just ignores formula cells entirely for
the moment. If anyone is interested in helping with this (preferrably with
parser experience) check out the poi-dev list over on Jakarta.
I thin
>> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>
>> POI stuff committed with samples.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Please cross check.
> Wow. Looks cool! However, some examples behave *very* strange with
> Office XP...
>
> Vadim
Can you be a bit more specific? Is this something other than the al
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>POI stuff committed with samples.
>
>:-)
>
>Please cross check.
>
Very, very interesting stuff; I have been testing it with OpenOffice
Build 641b, and all samples technically work, although I have never seen
a sample using formulas for calculation; those fields where
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> POI stuff committed with samples.
>
> :-)
>
> Please cross check.
Wow. Looks cool! However, some examples behave *very* strange with
Office XP...
Vadim
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> - v
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> POI stuff committed with samples.
>
> :-)
>
> Please cross check.
BTW, there's still a (known) issue: cell values are presented multiple times
in a cell if horizontal alignment is not specified.
The solution is in the works.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi
45 matches
Mail list logo
