:
From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 19,
2003 5:19 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
So, I'd say lets cut to the chase. Do B4, and if it's good, let's
just go with it. If the fence sitters come up with anything
]
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
David == David M Karr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Is there an easy way to get the diffs or comments
of all elements with commits
David since the 1.1b3 tagging?
If it's useful, I figured out how to get the diffs
Try out Ant's cvstagdiff task - there is even an XSL file to turn
this into a nice report built into the Ant 1.5+ distribution.
Details:
http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/manual/CoreTasks/cvstagdiff.html
Erik
On Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 03:01 AM, David M. Karr wrote:
David == David M Karr
It was my original understanding that Struts-el lived in the contrib
folder, as Craig mentioned he would do with Struts-JSF. One advantage of
this is that Struts-el (and Struts-JSF) could have their own release cycle.
In general, I would to see us position Struts as a model and view
agnostic
Ted Husted wrote:
Of course, since this is a majority vote situation,
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html
these -1s will not prevent a release, unless other committers change
their vote. (My chance to veto the idea unilaterally was when the
build.xml was first changed, but that boat
Regardless of what we do in this instance, could we clarify as a guideline
1) Whether Beta to Release candidate votes are on corresponding CVS tag.
2) Whether we want to go from the nightly build to a RC without an
intervening beta.
Whatever teams like Tomcat and Ant are doing would be fine
James Turner wrote:
I would suggest that struts-el be packaged as a separate
download from the Struts 1.1 core, on the grounds that...
I can take the alternate view, which is that because struts-el is in the
contrib directory, it implicitly has lower standards for release quality
that the core
Ted == Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ted As it stands, struts-el has been documented as a contribution and does not
Ted appear with the other developer guides (mea culpa). Making it a standalone
Ted distribution is just a matter of changing the build script. This would then
Martin Cooper wrote:
Given that there have been around 50 commits since 1.1-b3, and there
arecurrently 21 Bugzilla issues outstanding, in all honesty, I would
find it hard to claim that 1.1-b3 is really a release candidate.
I would prefer to take what we have now, or in a (very) short time
Ted said (I just love that aliteration...):
My suggestion would be to schedule a Beta 4 against the
nightly build,
and then to not hesitate releasing B4 as Struts 1.1. final if
it flies.
The idea being we suspect that B4 is a defacto release
candidate, and
may go from B4 to Release,
Be that as it may, there is not a strict technical requirement that any
of the Struts taglibs be bundled in the core JAR or that the releases
coincide with the release of the Action and Config packages.
Is the struts-el taglib now actually broken because html:link gained a
missing property? Or
Anyone still sitting on the fence at this point is probably going to sit
there through the final release, or would poke around for weeks before
looking at it.
Personally, I say we fix the 8 issues, release B4, and if nothing
critical comes up in a week or ten days, go to Struts 1.1 final.
From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
So, I'd say lets cut to the chase. Do B4, and if it's good,
let's just
go with it. If the fence sitters come up
Ted == Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ted Is the struts-el taglib now actually broken because html:link gained a missing
Ted property? Or does it simply fail to meet one of our expectations for the
taglib?
No, I certainly wouldn't call it broken, just that it wouldn't support an
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Ted Husted wrote:
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 06:42:26 -0500
From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Struts Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Struts Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
It was my original
On 19 Jan 2003, David M. Karr wrote:
I don't know enough about what exactly Struts-JSF will be doing to really
compare it, but I would guess that it won't be as intimately tied to the Struts
MVC core or to the Struts tag library, which would make it logical to be
released separately.
I
to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the
latter.)
-Ted.
James Turner wrote:
From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
So, I'd say lets cut
PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 19,
2003 5:19 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
So, I'd say lets cut to the chase. Do B4, and if it's good, let's
just go with it. If the fence sitters come up with anything once
final ships, we go
then suggest converting the beta 4
to a release candidate or even the final release. (And I would favor the
latter.)
-Ted.
James Turner wrote:
From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 5:19 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3
List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
So, I'd say lets cut to the chase. Do B4, and if it's good, let's
just go with it. If the fence sitters come up with anything once
final ships, we go with an early Struts 1.1.1. Let's get the momentum
up, and trust
Martin Cooper wrote:
Perhaps surprisingly, other than fixing the 8 bugs, there
really isn't that much difference. Renaming B3 to RC1 sounds
simple, but in practice, it requires a fair amount of work.
Make that 5 bugs...
James
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
David Graham wrote:
+1
Didn't David add the cdata/comments to the Javascript Tag that he and
Martin were talking about
on Thursday. It seemed that there was still disagreement that was a good
thing ?
Would those end up in the RC1 from the head of the CVS tree or are we
voting on the
David == David Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David The only added attribute was cdata that defaults to true on the javascript
David tag. I'd like to see this included in the release because it rounds out the
David xhtml functionality.
David We have yet to hear back from
David == David M Karr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David == David Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David The only added attribute was cdata that defaults to true on the javascript
David tag. I'd like to see this included in the release because it rounds out the
David xhtml
Is that a -1 for 1.1 or -1 for any release?
Dave
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Karr)
Reply-To: Struts Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
Date: 18 Jan 2003 13:13:43 -0800
David == David M Karr [EMAIL
On 18 Jan 2003, David M. Karr wrote:
David == David M Karr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David == David Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David The only added attribute was cdata that defaults to true on the
javascript
David tag. I'd like to see this included in the release because
David == David Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Is that a -1 for 1.1 or -1 for any release?
David Dave
I very much want to see a 1.1 release very soon, I just don't think the release
candidate should be the 1.1b3 release.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Karr)
In line with Craig's note earlier tonight, and the semi-voting that is
already going on under another subject, I thought I'd make it
formal/binding. So:
+1 if you agree that the Struts 1.3b3 release should be declared the
initial release candidate for the 1.1 release, with an RC2 in early
+1
Craig
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, James Turner wrote:
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:00:23 -0500
From: James Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Struts Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
In line with Craig's note earlier
+1
--
James Mitchell
- Original Message -
From: James Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:00 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Declare Struts 1.1b3 as Struts 1.1 RC1
In line with Craig's note earlier tonight, and the semi-voting that is
already going
30 matches
Mail list logo
