Just a side note -- should the docs be committed to CVS? I'm not sure if
that's entirely a good (or bad) idea. I was kinda imagining that the docs
would be autogenerated by the "dist" Ant target and bundled in with the zip
file.
-Pat
- Original Message -
From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PRO
Seraph (aka atlassian-security but less boringly named) is now up -
http://opensource.atlassian.com/seraph
Profiling is also up - http://opensource.atlassian.com/profiling
I'll contact James about putting scheduler back into Quartz, it really
should be there - it doesn't deserve it's own package.
I'm willing to support any and all efforts to document XW and WW2... I'm
trying to find the time to finish up my little example app (which shows
all of the configurations for a ww2 app), but I'll happily answer any
questions.
I think the problem we have is that while the features are relatively
w
Yeah, I think you said something about opensourcing Jira :-)
We were all drunk, so I could be wrong :-)
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Cannon-Brookes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 7:49 PM
> To: opensymphony-developers; Jason Carreira;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED
If your errors are set into your action, they will still be available.
Just because the action is not executed does not mean it's not available
on the stack for Ognl expressions...
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexandru Roman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 6:56
Hello,
Your "press release" gave a lot of good information on XWork and WW2 (well, at least
for me the new user of WW1.3 anyways)... the highlighting of the separation is
definitely a great finding for us. I found your writing informative and helpful, and
the first paragraph below is great too!
Sounds like a great idea. Joe Ottinger monitors this list, and he's the J2EE editor
for JDJ, so he's the man to talk to :-)
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 9:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork
Okay, now that WW2 is in beta, I finally decided I'd give it the old
college try... and decided that, hey, I didn't go to college, maybe I
should wait.
However... I'd still like to take a shot at it. The docs, as usual, blow,
so here's my continuing (and standing) offer: I'll be glad to help write
Normally after an action is executed, the output can reference
information from the originating action with ognl through getters and
setters or direct method calls (ie $person.name:
getPerson().getName()).
If I intercept and short circuit an action (ie do not invoke it), what
is the proper way to
I've updated the text to reflect that you are just adding support for
Xwork actions to Jpublish.
> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Eden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 11:29 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XW/WW2 "press release" text fo
Cameron,
JPublish users requested that the current JPublish Action API be kept
while still allowing for XWork to be used from within JPublish. That is
the current design and that is how it will stay for JPublish 3.x.
Sincerely,
Anthony Eden
Cameron Braid wrote:
Since you want us to know this,
Having just started working with WW2/XW, and liking it very much, an associate
and I were thinking of putting together something also. Perhaps rather than a
pure web-based tutorial (like Tracy is doing), we can present it in the form of
an article / series of articles in order to reach an audience
Ok, ok... We'll save it for the final release.
> -Original Message-
> From: Pat Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:34 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XW/WW2 "press release" text for review
>
>
> > I thought the writing was pre
That would be nice, but unfortunately Jira is down half the time.
> -Original Message-
> From: Pat Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] WW2 property file
>
>
> Jason,
> Should we be keeping trac
Jason,
Should we be keeping track of a changes.txt file? Why not just point to JIRA
changelog? I'd much rather do that as it also promotes putting _all_ bug
fixes and feature requests/changes in to JIRA.
-Pat
- Original Message -
From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROT
> I thought the writing was pretty good. I on the other hand question the
> need for boasting about a beta. It'd be weird to do a press release now,
> and then a similar one in a week or two when the final release is out.
+1 on that :)
---
Th
Since you want us to know this, can you please indicate why you have
made this decision ?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Anthony Eden
Sent: Wednesday, 20 August 2003 1:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XW/WW2 "press rel
I am not replacing the command framework in JPublish with XWork. I was
considering it at one point but have decided not to make that change.
Sincerely,
Anthony Eden
Jason Carreira wrote:
I've written up a short "press release" to go as an announcement to TSS
and JavaLobby and on the OpenSymphon
Title: Message
From a given alias (eg
'/products/search') both a default Action would need to be found and a
default Result.
Currently the behaviour of this search is defined
by the abstract factory, DefaultActionProxyFactory. This factory creates a
DefaultActionProxy instance which cre
Jason,
Yes, I will... but still some todos before publishing the code :)
not yet... Can do this later today...
--Rainer
--
Rainer Hermanns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Woperstr. 34 tel: +49 (0)170 - 3432 912
D-52134 Herzogenrath
This is awesome... You should send this over to the SnipSnap guys,
too... Did you get the docs down for WW2? I see them in the Xwork CVS
tree, but not WW2.
> -Original Message-
> From: Rainer Hermanns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 4:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 8/18/03 7:20 AM, "Francisco Hernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can we have a sneak peak at what you've done?
>
> I was about to post a question asking if anyone has started to work on
> anykind of xwork/webwork2 introductory article or tutorial.
I've got a couple of projects demanding my
> -Original Message-
> From: Rickard Öberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I thought the writing was pretty good. I on the other hand
> question the
> need for boasting about a beta. It'd be weird to do a press
> release now,
> and then a similar one in a week or two when the final re
Sounds great. Go ahead and check it in and update the changes.txt.
Thanks,
Jason
> -Original Message-
> From: Rainer Hermanns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 5:59 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] WW2 property file
>
>
> Jason,
>
> I kn
The problem is that HTML forms pass an empty string when you leave a
field blank. They don't leave the field out, so there's always a value.
If you have a string property, you should use the required string
validator.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent
Jason,
I know a lot of people using these additional property file definition
for their custom properties, they want to use within their applications.
So, the properties to be included are not typically webwork related
properties, but custom properties which can be loaded using the default
Conf
I've got that already - the validation is firing, it's just that the
getFieldValue method, which ends up calling Ognl, returns an empty string
when i'm expecting a null string, unless i'm doing something wrong (which
i'm going to assume I am at this stage).
Ben.
-Original Message-
From: F
something I was forgetting to do when testing the validation framework
was applying the ValidatorInteceptor in the interceptor-stack I was
using for that action.
Ben Hall wrote:
I'm trying to make the required field validator work for me but i'm having a
slight problem. The value that is return
Yes. This is declared in velocity templates for most controls as well as
controlheader.vm. I did a small performance test and the execution time
dropped by 40-50 ms on my laptop. No biggie since some of it might be
due to the extra log.warn as well. Removing the getText()-entries in the
control
I'm trying to make the required field validator work for me but i'm having a
slight problem. The value that is returned by the call within the validator
- getFieldValue(fieldName, object), seems to always return a non null value.
My velocity template looks a little like this:
#tag (TextField
30 matches
Mail list logo
