On 4/10/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
looks good (niclas has already discussed Wicket vs Apache Wicket)
Ok, thanks for the feedback. In a couple of days I'll be able to cut a
new release (we're renaming everything to org.apache.wicket currently,
and that is of course not
On 4/10/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MANIFESTs are a little controversial (there are multiple specs which
> are open to interpretation). i'm of the maximal school of thought:
> putting everything in which people thin
On 4/10/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 17:50, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Specification-Title: Wicket
> Implementation-Title: Wicket
Not sure if it matters much, but your will be known as Apache Wicket to
safe-guard against trademark protection and similar i
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 17:50, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Specification-Title: Wicket
> Implementation-Title: Wicket
Not sure if it matters much, but your will be known as Apache Wicket to
safe-guard against trademark protection and similar issues.
Cheers
Niclas
On 4/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MANIFESTs are a little controversial (there are multiple specs which
are open to interpretation). i'm of the maximal school of thought:
putting everything in which people think are required stops sniping.
I have updated our build, and
On 4/7/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Robert, Thanks for taking the time to look at our precious :).
Answers inline.
On 4/7/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> minor issues
> ---
>
Hi Robert, Thanks for taking the time to look at our precious :).
Answers inline.
On 4/7/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
questions
The library for dragging the AJAX debug dialog has the following
notice:
On 4/7/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 06 April 2007 20:12, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> http://code.google.com/p/arat/
>
> it's at google code since i didn't think that there'd be enough
> development interest to sustain something at apache. if there is then
> i'd be ha
On Friday 06 April 2007 20:12, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> http://code.google.com/p/arat/
>
> it's at google code since i didn't think that there'd be enough
> development interest to sustain something at apache. if there is then
> i'd be happy to move it here. i'm liberal with karma.
Ok, I hav
On Saturday 07 April 2007 06:11, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> BTW i see the current namespace is http://wicket.sourceforge.net/. do
> you plan to change this upon (sometime)?
Yes, I asked that earlier. The namespace change will happen between this
alpha/review and the final. It is apparently a
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, in light of our incubation progress we feel the urge to get
confirmation that we resolved our legal issues and are able to come
together and build a release. We kindly request the Incubator PMC to
approve this release.
question
On 4/6/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 06 April 2007 15:38, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> (BTW if anyone wants to help out on RAT, it would be really appreciated :-)
Before committing to cycles, where is the sources
http://code.google.com/p/arat/
it's at google code s
On Friday 06 April 2007 15:38, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> (BTW if anyone wants to help out on RAT, it would be really appreciated :-)
Before committing to cycles, where is the sources and what features are
missing?
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.c
On 4/4/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/4/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there have been changes since the release was cut, a new release
> must IMHO be created, so that people can vote (on the wicket lists
> first, and then come back here) on the corr
On 4/4/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...In order to graduate, a podling is required to
build a release, if only it is a developer only release (take the
harmony podling as an example)...
Ok, I understand the intent better now, and I agree with it.
...What do you need for it
On 4/4/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...Perhaps the Incubator should introduce a "Release Simulation Procedure" which
EMULATES the real thing, a dry run, "run --verbose --no-output".
I like the idea, making it clear the releases are cut in "simulation
mode" would be good wh
On 4/4/07, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...there's no reason to
that the release candidate should be pulled immediately from the disk
if there's a chance we might get valuable feedback from it...
Agreed. But I thought (according to the thread subject) that you were
looking for +1s to
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 22:09, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> This is not what (most) of the mentors and IPMC members here have
> voiced in the past. In order to graduate, a podling is required to
> build a release, if only it is a developer only release (take the
> harmony podling as an example).
P
On 4/4/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If there have been changes since the release was cut, a new release
must IMHO be created, so that people can vote (on the wicket lists
first, and then come back here) on the correct one.
Like Gwyn said, we'd rather wait until *all* feedb
On 04/04/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/31/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>.../src/testing/wicket-threadtest/src/main/java/wicket/threadtest/App2Test1.java
>
> Ai! A sandbox project that slipped our attention I'm afraid. Thanks
> for finding it. I fixed
On 3/31/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>.../src/testing/wicket-threadtest/src/main/java/wicket/threadtest/App2Test1.java
Ai! A sandbox project that slipped our attention I'm afraid. Thanks
for finding it. I fixed it and added our unit test for header files to
that project.
If t
Hey,
that's what I do in a similar fashion. Since it takes to long amout of
time, I "deploy" the stuff to a folder on my box, ZIP it and upload
it. on people.a.o I run unzip.
So, keeping the ZIP / tarball at the root of the stage repo, would be
a good work around.
But spider is cooler :-)
On
On 4/2/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/1/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We appreciate the effort!
i'm very sad to say that i'm afraid that i might not get the cycle's i
hoped this week :-/
what did you have in mind?
Just something that would make y
I'm there, but I was hoping to get Wicket ratified long before that :)
Martijn
On 4/2/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe cool to give it some time at the hackathon ?
Don't if Martijn is going to be there ?
Mvgr,
Martin
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 4/1/07, Martijn Da
Maybe cool to give it some time at the hackathon ?
Don't if Martijn is going to be there ?
Mvgr,
Martin
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 4/1/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We appreciate the effort!
>
> i'm very sad to say that i'm afraid that i might not get the cycle's i
>
On 4/1/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We appreciate the effort!
i'm very sad to say that i'm afraid that i might not get the cycle's i
hoped this week :-/
The maven repo can of course be retrieved by logging on to p.a.o and
creating a tar ball (or I can make one available if
We appreciate the effort!
The maven repo can of course be retrieved by logging on to p.a.o and
creating a tar ball (or I can make one available if that is needed).
Would some ant script be of any help?
Martijn
On 4/1/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dash
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you find any missing or incorrect license headers, we have a list
of specific files we found to be exempt of the license issue, because
they are either non-creative, generated or used as test comparison
material. [4]
thanks :-)
RAT
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A maven 2 repository containing the released binary artifacts:
-
http://people.apache.org/~dashorst/releases/apache-wicket-1.3.0-incubating-alpha/repo
there are too many artifacts for me to check manually. i need to write
a spider for
It sounds like the wicket.* -> org.apache.wicket.* change is to happen in 1.3
from the pointers you gave,
Yep, that change will be done shortly. Maybe this weekend.
yet the "alpha" is not there yet. Is that correctly understood?
Indeed. We first want to have a release that passes here, and w
On Saturday 31 March 2007 16:19, Gwyn Evans wrote:
> For the first point, the 1.3 release was always due to be a wicket.*
> release, so we understood that using the wicket.* namespace wasn't a
> show-stopper - as for the second, this 1.3 release is more to validate
> the legal release aspects rath
Missed out linking to this roadmap vote - http://snipurl.com/1en4v
/Gwyn
On 31/03/07, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 31/03/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2007 17:45, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> > We consider this release to be for resolving legal issue
On 31/03/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2007 17:45, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> We consider this release to be for resolving legal issues only, and
> will not make it available to the general public. The reasoning behind
> this is that we are still working on some
On Friday 30 March 2007 17:45, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> We consider this release to be for resolving legal issues only, and
> will not make it available to the general public. The reasoning behind
> this is that we are still working on some major changes that need time
> to mature in these weeks.
Hey Martin,
yes that file is fine.
-source and -javadoc have issues
no notice and license in javadoc
and source has:
notice in ROOT
and in target/META-INF/
(same for license)
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And we use the maven-remote-resources plugin, with the f
And we use the maven-remote-resources plugin, with the following
incubator resource bundle:
org.apache:apache-incubator-disclaimer-resource-bundle:1.1
This one provides the DISCLAIMER (without extension)
Martijn
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is there, at least in
oh... :)
looked in wrong place.
On 3/30/07, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
/META-INF/Disclaimer ?
/Gwyn
On 30/03/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martijn,
>
> I am not seeing DISCLAIMER.txt in the JARs
>
> perhaps you wanna check:
>
http://svn.apache.org/view
It is there, at least in the wicket-1.3.0-incubating-alpha.jar:
META-INF/DISCLAIMER
(without .txt)
Martijn
On 3/30/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martijn,
I am not seeing DISCLAIMER.txt in the JARs
perhaps you wanna check:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/adffaces/
/META-INF/Disclaimer ?
/Gwyn
On 30/03/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martijn,
I am not seeing DISCLAIMER.txt in the JARs
perhaps you wanna check:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/adffaces/branches/matzew-core-1.0.0-incubation/
we managed it w/ using the "remote-reso
Martijn,
I am not seeing DISCLAIMER.txt in the JARs
perhaps you wanna check:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/adffaces/branches/matzew-core-1.0.0-incubation/
we managed it w/ using the "remote-resource-plugin"
HTH,
Matthias
On 3/30/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
htt
http://people.apache.org/~dashorst/releases/apache-wicket-1.3.0-incubating-alpha/m2-repo/
is the right link for the repo
On 3/30/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Wicket community voted to release its first incubator release.
Wicket is a component based Java web application fr
The Wicket community voted to release its first incubator release.
Wicket is a component based Java web application framework, undergoing
incubation since october 2006 [1]. The Wicket community asks the
Incubator PMC to ratify this release. The vote results can be found
here [2].
We consider this
42 matches
Mail list logo
