Hi,
This is just a tiny issue, so I don't want to involve issuetracking.
I'm dealing with i18n translation, so I decided to generate properties
from default locale. I've annotated my constants with @Generate as
provided in:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:11 AM, T tomek.maty...@gmail.com wrote:
This is just a tiny issue, so I don't want to involve issuetracking.
I'm dealing with i18n translation, so I decided to generate properties
from default locale. I've annotated my constants with @Generate as
provided in:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1375802/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
(right):
Revision: 9823
Author: fabb...@google.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 08:59:35 2011
Log: Adding junit-stripped variation of testng, which used to embed junit
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9823
Added:
/tools/lib/testng/README
/tools/lib/testng/strip_junit.sh
Pre-existing non-conforming, but yes, they should all use our jar.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:24 PM, j...@google.com wrote:
LGTM
Why do some of our .classpath entries reference the JUnit jar directly,
and others reference the Eclipse library JUNIT_CONTAINER?
It seems likely that you need to
Revision: 9824
Author: gwt.mirror...@gmail.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 09:11:26 2011
Log: property fall back value evaluation scheme - enable fall back bindings.
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369807
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9824
Added:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1374801/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
LGTM assuming you verified api-checker and cldr-import work with the new
jars.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1374801/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: rjrjr, jlabanca, jat,
Description:
add ie9 user.agent with fallback binding to ie8. (in preparation for ie9
support).
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369808/
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/user/UserAgent.gwt.xml
Index:
LGTM
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
On 2011/03/07 16:43:50, jlabanca wrote:
adapted from http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1183801/show
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1371810/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Hi,
I signed the individual CLA through the online form (I think it was last
friday) and just wondering if there is any response from Google when its
accepted?
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Hi,
Is there a way to tell if the checkin above
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9659 made
it into the latest GWT 2.2?
We have been having issues with our 'large' application using sencha
GXT with GWT2.1.
Hi,
I've fixed an issue in gwt-user but I wasn't able to run the test I wrote.
Running the test in Eclipse as a JUnit test fails and gives me a lot
of com.google.gwt.core.ext.UnableToCompleteException. It tells me to look
for the previous errors but I have so many of
these
No, there is no automated acknowledgement, but I just checked and can see
that it got here OK.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Jens jens.nehlme...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I signed the individual CLA through the online form (I think it was last
friday) and just wondering if there is any
On 5 Mrz., 04:38, Deepak Khosla dkho...@x-iss.com wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to tell if the checkin
abovehttp://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9659made
it into the latest GWT 2.2?
We have been having issues with our 'large' application using sencha
GXT with
One other thing we should talk about is ditching all of the static-ness.
The static-ness doesn't gel well with CompilationStateBuilder. CSB is
usually a singleton, but you can instantiate an isolated CSB for testing
which has a distinct cache that cannot be interfered with. It seems
like CSB
Revision: 9825
Author: fabb...@google.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 08:22:05 2011
Log: Switching to the junit4 jars, although the @annotation stuff isn't
going to work. Also switching to the non-junit4 testng jars, to avoid
classpath order confusion.
Review at
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369808/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
I agree with making PUC non-static. This reduces the need to synchronize
on getting instance, etc.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1375802/diff/5002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
(right):
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Fixed validation classifier, added clean plugin to prevent gwt-user from
being deployed to GAE, upgraded to GAE 1.4.2
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1377802/
Affected files:
M samples/expenses/pom.xml
Index:
LGTM, I have no substantive comments, go forth and code some more.
I was asking myself if the stack approach might increase memory
requirements, but the entire tree must already be in memory, so I
stopped worrying about it.
Okay.. so should I submit this? That way, future reviews will be vs.
trunk.
Maybe I should add a basic unit test to make sure that this at least
doesn't crash, and maybe even that the output is the same as the web
mode compiler for some test file.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:36 PM, sco...@google.com wrote:
Okay.. so should I submit this? That way, future reviews will be vs.
trunk.
Maybe I should add a basic unit test to make sure that this at least
doesn't crash, and maybe even that the output is the same as the web
mode compiler for
Reviewers: unnurg,
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1370808/diff/2001/gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/linker/GadgetLinker.java
File gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/linker/GadgetLinker.java
(right):
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
PatternValidator matches the whole input string.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 111 of 257 (43.19%) Pass with 19 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1378801/
Affected files:
M
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Handle custom constraint violation messages.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 110 of 257 (42.80%) Pass with 20 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1379801/
Affected files:
M
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Let the Key for Maps be of type Object.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 110 of 257 (42.80%) Pass with 20 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1376803/
Affected files:
M
28 matches
Mail list logo
