Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 25.07.2005 10:57, Upayavira wrote:
I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
But I came across a strange thing: There is no scratchpad block in the
branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the branch not handled in the
same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't this be done transparent
to the users? And while we are at it: From what I see the
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 24.07.2005 14:53, Michael Wechner wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving
also CSVGenerator?
sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
TraversableGenerator
XPathTraversableGenerator
I have done it
I think we should really start seeing branch as what it should be: a
maintenance branch ;) And try to get a 2.2 out asap.
Carsten
+1
Alfred.
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality
Nathaniel Alfred wrote:
I think we should really start seeing branch as what it should be: a
maintenance branch ;) And try to get a 2.2 out asap.
+1. Although, let's call it trunk. We'll decide its numbering when we
get closer to completion :-)
Regards, Upayavira
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
And why are the blocks in the
branch not handled in the same way (svn:external) as in trunk?
(Some) blocks from the branch differ from the trunk versions due to changes in
Cocoon core.
Vadim
On 24.07.2005 22:08, Ralph Goers wrote:
My understanding is that gump only builds the latest version. That
would be trunk.
This should not prevent us from building 2.1 branch as it would control
also our dependencies between the blocks.
Joerg
On 25.07.2005 09:54, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
We voted some time ago to have the scratchpad block only once (in
trunk). This makes developing new stuff easier as you don't have to
synchronize with the branch etc.
Ok, did not kow that. I copied the CSVGenerator from trunk to the
branch. Will
On 25.07.2005 10:57, Upayavira wrote:
I have done it already yesterday. The main reason was that you don't
seem to have commit rights on Cocoon:
http://people.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#cocoon. Furthermore we
talked about it since two years and nobody complained.
See this in
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
CSVGenerator?
sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
TraversableGenerator
XPathTraversableGenerator
CVSGenerator
I will try to do this by Wednesday or Thursday, because I will be offline
for
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
ideally, the two would be merged, and the traversable generator would
emit the directory xml format for file sources for compatibility
agreed, but I think for backwards compatibility reasons we cannot do this.
But we might want to deprecate the
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Michael Wechner wrote:
Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
CSVGenerator?
I just noticed that joerg has already moved the Traversables on Sat 23 ;-)
Michi
--
Michael Wechner
Wyona - Open Source Content Management -
On 24.07.2005 14:53, Michael Wechner wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Nope. And while you're at it (/me is lazy), would you mind moving also
CSVGenerator?
sure (if nobody else minds). So I will move
TraversableGenerator
XPathTraversableGenerator
I have done it already yesterday. The main
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
But I came across a strange thing: There is no scratchpad block in
the branch. Why? And why are the blocks in the branch not handled in
the same way (svn:external) as in trunk? Couldn't this be done
transparent to the users? And while we are at it: From what I see the
Hi
I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because it
supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
DirectoryGenerator.
Otherwise people have to enable the
Le 23 juil. 05, à 14:04, Michael Wechner a écrit :
...I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
it supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
Michael Wechner wrote:
Hi
I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because it
supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
DirectoryGenerator.
Otherwise
Michael Wechner wrote:
Hi
I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
it supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
DirectoryGenerator.
Otherwise
Michael Wechner wrote:
Hi
I would like to suggest that we move the TraversableGenerator into
Cocoon core.
It seems to me that the TraversableGenerator is very useful, because
it supports
the excalibur Source in general and not just the FileSource like the
DirectoryGenerator.
Otherwise
19 matches
Mail list logo
