On May 3, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
On 5/3/10, Remy Blank remy.bl...@pobox.com wrote:
Olemis Lang wrote:
I am not sure , but I suppose that if a timestamp (e.g. CSS | EGG file
creation time) is sent back to the client when requesting static
resources then the browser should notice
Super excited about finally getting this out. Great work, and thanks everyone!
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Noah Kantrowitz n...@coderanger.net wrote:
On May 3, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
On 5/3/10, Remy Blank remy.bl...@pobox.com wrote:
Olemis Lang wrote:
I am not sure , but I
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Noah Kantrowitz n...@coderanger.net wrote:
On May 3, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
On 5/3/10, Remy Blank remy.bl...@pobox.com wrote:
Olemis Lang wrote:
I am not sure , but I suppose that if a timestamp (e.g. CSS | EGG file
creation time) is sent back to
Thanks for the new release and your effort!
I upgraded from 0.11.7 to the new beta and almost everything works.
However, in one project I am not able to edit wiki pages, because the
edit stuff does not appear and the whole edit page seems to be mixed
up.
There were no log entries and my 3 other
I don't now why, but the error disappeared after a few restarts of
tracd.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Trac
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Simon Martin wrote:
I don't now why, but the error disappeared after a few restarts of
tracd.
This is likely due to the browser caching the Trac CSS. I have seen
similar effects that went away with a Shift+reload.
Maybe we should add a comment to that effect on TracUpgrade? Or is there
a way
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Remy Blank remy.bl...@pobox.com wrote:
Simon Martin wrote:
I don't now why, but the error disappeared after a few restarts of
tracd.
This is likely due to the browser caching the Trac CSS. I have seen
similar effects that went away with a Shift+reload.
Maybe
Olemis Lang wrote:
I am not sure , but I suppose that if a timestamp (e.g. CSS | EGG file
creation time) is sent back to the client when requesting static
resources then the browser should notice that there's a new file in
the server and reload it into its own cache
Chrome.process_request()
On 5/3/10, Remy Blank remy.bl...@pobox.com wrote:
Olemis Lang wrote:
I am not sure , but I suppose that if a timestamp (e.g. CSS | EGG file
creation time) is sent back to the client when requesting static
resources then the browser should notice that there's a new file in
the server
