Hi Lars, We resolved the issue this morning, so no need to look into anything ;-) The fix was pretty trivial.
One thing I would like to point out, though, dojo recently released 1.1.1, might consider upgrading to that. Cheers, Craig > -----Original Message----- > From: Lars Trieloff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 4:23 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Dojo Bundles > > Alex is right. It is a symptom of allowing me to write code ;-) > > I will have a deeper look into this issue tomorrow, as I need > some time to catch up with latest development. > > Lars > > On Jun 2, 2008, at 20:20 , Alexander Klimetschek wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Craig L. Ching > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >>> Yes, and they are sign of a quick dojo hack ;-) > >>> > >> Quick? No, dojo has been like that forever. Hack? Maybe. > > > > I meant the missing dojo.require should have been in the (custom) > > code. Dojo's require system is great! > > > >> Anyway, don't mean to be argumentative, but I actually really like > >> dojo's require system. Once you get used to it, it's not so bad > >> tracking down these sorts of problems. Indeed, once you > understand > >> it, it rarely comes up because you code against having > these sorts of > >> problems by nature. > > > > I like the require system, too, since it allows for different > > deployments of the library code: as single, original js files for > > debugging, as bundles for sub-modules including several js files in > > one and as a big all-in-one package of everything you need for your > > page. That is really helpful in a world of > 10.000 lines of > > client-side javascript... > > > > Alex > > > > -- > > Alexander Klimetschek > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
