Le 20 juil. 05, à 01:08, Dion Gillard a écrit :
could you make the version tag 1.2-SNAPSHOT instead of -dev? That
keeps it all consistent.
I wanted to ask about this.
Actually, I've also made 1.1-dev into jelly's project.xml.
Isn't SNAPSHOT supposed to be a (fake but complete) version number?
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JELLY-173?page=comments#action_12316206 ]
Paul Libbrecht commented on JELLY-173:
--
Definitely on the current subversion state, the one of xml taglib and jelly.
thanks
paul
Support for XML Schema
Can someone associated w/ file upload get the 1.1-dev jar to maven?
We're using it in Geronimo now, and want to make it easy. If no one
cares, I'll be happy to do it, but wanted to ask first.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-primitives has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-primitives has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
unreleased files should go to http://cvs.apache.org/repository, which I
believe you already have in your remote repo settings?
BTW, have you guys tried the Maven 1.1-beta with Geronimo? It should
lessen the extent of your SNAPSHOT issues.
- - Brett
Is there anything I can do to help? Provide some report or something?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project commons-jelly has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35445.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35445.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Although I haven't looked, this was almost certainly
caused by a recent update to
commons-collections-testframework (made the tests more
thorough).
Not sure when I'll get to look at it though.
Stephen
--- Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there anything I can do to help? Provide
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35445.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
On Jun 24, 2005, at 1:38 PM, Kristofer Eriksson wrote:
Secondly, to add to the above topic, I see the change in cache
behavior
(since the patch?!?). When calling a Tag a second time attributes not
specified will have values previously set, as mentioned by Brett.
First call: mylib:mytag
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35803.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35804.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Hi, all,
As a few of you know, I've been the primary developer on the
commons-pipeline project for a bit over a year now. For the past several
months, the project has languished while I've been occupied with other
things, but it's now seeing a lot of new development from a new
contributor. Since
I'm finding out if we can release this as ASL 1.1, or if we have to do ASL 2.0.
Hen
On 7/18/05, Torsten Curdt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A clirr/jdiff support would be could to do.
Will try to do that once I am back online.
Ok, guys ...I've run clirr against the
involved jars. Have a
Scratch that. Brett pointed out that that may no longer be a valid question.
What's the current plan to fix this? Or is it a question of which
plans to focus on?
I assume the easiest (but painful to some set of users) would be:
Rename ibiblio's 1.0 to 1.0-20040129.jar (or todays date, need to
I submitted bugzilla ticket number 33477 with code for
stored procedures. It wasn't accepted or rejected.
I would really like to get this code added to the
project so I don't have to maintain a local copy
anymore. DBUtils didn't have any support for stored
procedures, so this would be a good
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35803.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Author: oheger
Date: Wed Jul 20 11:33:14 2005
New Revision: 219960
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=219960view=rev
Log:
Fixed a bug in the unit test for XMLPropertiesConfiguration, which showed up
after configurations loaded from classpath have a valid base path
Modified:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31616.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35807.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35804.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35803.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35804.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35804.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35807.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33167.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35808.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Has there been any thought to either creating a new project which uses
Annotations to do validation or adding Annotation-based validation to
commons-validator? I really like the way the Hibernate folks have done
validation in Hibernate Annotations, but I think there needs to be a
generalized,
Right, and there is nothing there for fileupload.
I'll take the one from the tarball and put it there. Please yell if
you object.
geir
On Jul 20, 2005, at 4:43 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
unreleased files should go to
There is no clue in the commons-email documentation for hows to go
about getting it. The status section claims it is 1.0, it has been
moved out of the sandbox, but clicking on the download link provides
nothing, and there isn't even any info for building the thing. As far
as I can tell, it is,
Hi Sam,
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 19:14 -0700, Sam Gendler wrote:
There is no clue in the commons-email documentation for hows to go
about getting it. The status section claims it is 1.0, it has been
moved out of the sandbox, but clicking on the download link provides
nothing, and there isn't
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 13:54 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
Scratch that. Brett pointed out that that may no longer be a valid question.
Has he??
What's the current plan to fix this? Or is it a question of which
plans to focus on?
I assume the easiest (but painful to some set of users)
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 10:46 -0600, Kris Nuttycombe wrote:
Hi, all,
As a few of you know, I've been the primary developer on the
commons-pipeline project for a bit over a year now. For the past several
months, the project has languished while I've been occupied with other
things, but it's
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Kris Nuttycombe wrote:
Hi, all,
As a few of you know, I've been the primary developer on the
commons-pipeline project for a bit over a year now. For the past several
months, the project has languished while I've been occupied with other
things, but it's now seeing a lot
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Right, and there is nothing there for fileupload.
I'll take the one from the tarball and put it there. Please yell if you
object.
No objection. ;-) It looks like you beat me to it, but thanks for asking.
--
Martin Cooper
geir
On Jul 20,
39 matches
Mail list logo
