svn commit: r391219 - /incubator/webwork2/src/java/org/apache/struts/webwork/

Author: mrdon Date: Mon Apr 3 20:06:35 2006 New Revision: 391219 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391219&view=rev Log: removing empty webwork directory Removed: incubator/webwork2/src/java/org/apache/struts/webwork/

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39191] New: - [shale] Remoting should set cache-disabling headers on dynamic calls

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: [Action2] Replacing the OpenSymphony copyright

On 4/3/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Patrick's code grant came in, so we can now replace the copyright on all the > OpenSymphony-licensed files. While I don't > mind doing the grunt work, I had a question: is there a "policy" on the use > of the $Id line as the first line in the > l

svn commit: r391159 - /struts/action/trunk/build/pom.xml

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 15:35:21 2006 New Revision: 391159 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391159&view=rev Log: Corrected the path to the 'core' module. Modified: struts/action/trunk/build/pom.xml Modified: struts/action/trunk/build/pom.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/

[Action2] Replacing the OpenSymphony copyright

Patrick's code grant came in, so we can now replace the copyright on all the OpenSymphony-licensed files. While I don't mind doing the grunt work, I had a question: is there a "policy" on the use of the $Id line as the first line in the license? Does it require any subversion configuration for

Re: [Proposal] Flattening the sandbox

On 4/3/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree with the no release policy, but sometimes you do have a need for a > simple branch. Actually, the proper term > would probably be "shelf" [1]. I've found shelves a great way to get your > own space to try new things, without > disrupting

Re: Action 1 consolidation testing (was Towards a stable 1.3 release)

On 4/3/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The 'actual' shell script that gets run nightly via cron is not under > svn. Since we run nightlies on our zone, it is merely a copy of the > one under svn and as changes come in, I review and then update my > copy. It's probably an unnecessa

Re: Action 1 consolidation testing (was Towards a stable 1.3 release)

James Mitchell wrote: Once we iron out action1 directories, I'll get that back online, but I'd like to wait till the dust settles before I pick up incubator/action2 nightly builds. If you are referring to the webwork2 incubated code, the only question mark in my mind relating to the build is

Re: Action 1 consolidation testing (was Towards a stable 1.3 release)

The 'actual' shell script that gets run nightly via cron is not under svn. Since we run nightlies on our zone, it is merely a copy of the one under svn and as changes come in, I review and then update my copy. It's probably an unnecessary level of security, but as long as my name and ASF

Re: [Proposal] Flattening the sandbox

I agree with the no release policy, but sometimes you do have a need for a simple branch. Actually, the proper term would probably be "shelf" [1]. I've found shelves a great way to get your own space to try new things, without disrupting the normal development process. Still, I'd imagine that

Re: [Proposal] Flattening the sandbox

I agree. Similar to how jakarta commons sandbox specifically disallows releases, we should probably have the same (sort of) policy in our sandbox. So without a release, there's not really a need for tags/branches. Your thoughts? -- James Mitchell On Apr 3, 2006, at 5:40 PM, Don Brown

[Proposal] Flattening the sandbox

I'd like to flatten the sandbox, leaving it up to each project whether they want tags or branches. For Struts 1.2 and earlier, the sandbox represented unfinished code relevant to the release, however now, it is a sandbox for the whole Struts project and not tied to Action 1. Therefore, I think

svn commit: r391140 - /struts/action/branches/STRUTS_1_2_BRANCH/

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 13:21:25 2006 New Revision: 391140 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391140&view=rev Log: Updated svn:externals for Struts 1.2 branch after reorg. Modified: struts/action/branches/STRUTS_1_2_BRANCH/ (props changed) Propchange: struts/action/branches/STR

svn commit: r391134 - /struts/action/branches/el/

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 13:14:00 2006 New Revision: 391134 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391134&view=rev Log: Bring back Struts EL branches after reorg. Added: struts/action/branches/el/ - copied from r390901, struts/el/branches/ --

svn commit: r391130 - /struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_8/

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 13:07:43 2006 New Revision: 391130 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391130&view=rev Log: Updated svn:externals for Struts 1.2.8 tag after reorg. Modified: struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_8/ (props changed) Propchange: struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_8/ ---

svn commit: r391125 - /struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_9/

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 12:38:36 2006 New Revision: 391125 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391125&view=rev Log: Updated svn:externals for Struts 1.2.9 tag after reorg. Modified: struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_9/ (props changed) Propchange: struts/action/tags/STRUTS_1_2_9/ ---

svn commit: r391123 - /struts/action/tags/faces/

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 12:29:55 2006 New Revision: 391123 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391123&view=rev Log: Bring back Struts Faces tags after reorg. Added: struts/action/tags/faces/ - copied from r390901, struts/faces/tags/ -

svn commit: r391121 - in /incubator/webwork2/src/test/org/apache/struts/action2: components/ config/ views/jsp/ui/

Author: tmjee Date: Mon Apr 3 12:20:24 2006 New Revision: 391121 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391121&view=rev Log: fixed failed test case Modified: incubator/webwork2/src/test/org/apache/struts/action2/components/ComponentTest.java incubator/webwork2/src/test/org/apache/stru

Re: svn commit: r390773 - /incubator/webwork2/pom.xml

None other than the fact I wasn't aware the other repo was there. I'll fix shortly. Patrick Lightbody Founder Autoriginate, Inc. http://www.autoriginate.com 503-488-5402 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Intelligent testing made convenient" On Apr 1, 2006, at 7:30 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote: On 4/1/06, [EMAIL

Re: Action 1 consolidation testing (was Towards a stable 1.3 release)

On 4/3/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, I'm hoping the nightly build scripts will be unaffected, although > I'd kinda be surprised. Let me know any way I can help fix them, if > they are indeed broken. It looks like Craig's are okay, but not the Maven-built ones. I made a change

svn commit: r391058 - /struts/current/nightly.sh

Author: wsmoak Date: Mon Apr 3 07:52:17 2006 New Revision: 391058 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391058&view=rev Log: Corrected path for Struts Action 1.3 nightly builds. Modified: struts/current/nightly.sh Modified: struts/current/nightly.sh URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/stru

svn commit: r391020 - in /struts/sandbox/trunk/action2/apps/mailreader/src: java/ java/mailreader2/ webapp/pages/

Author: husted Date: Mon Apr 3 04:50:24 2006 New Revision: 391020 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=391020&view=rev Log: MailReader * Correct various typos pointed out by Claus Ibsen * Refactor interceptor stacks * Remove unused Constants Added: struts/sandbox/trunk/action2/apps/mailr

Re: Action 1 consolidation testing (was Towards a stable 1.3 release)

To add to that, I'll update the website to reflect the changes as soon as they are all done. The only major one pending is the scripting move, which I want to give a day or two to get any possible feedback. Also, I'm hoping the nightly build scripts will be unaffected, although I'd kinda be s

Re: [Proposal] Merge Struts Scripting into Struts Extras

I'd like to amend this to bringing scripting into action1 as its own artifact, rather than integrating the code with extras. It will be easier and since it already has its own build, it should fit fine the way it is. Don On 3/31/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I propose, as my final