Re: Re: a couple of quick questions

Have fun.  We hope to have Tapestry proposed and moved over to Apache 
before you get back (haha)

;-)

-Andy

Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:

>That's largely what we've been doing.  I've been working in my own branch
>filling in 2.4 features; MB has started doing the same.  We can create
>additional, personal, branches for developers that want to start coding in
>2.4.  I'm concerned about problems when we merge, but the (now, monstrous!)
>test suite will help identify problems early.
>
>My generally release practice has been to run the release script (takes
>about 20 minutes to build a release ... mostly documentation), do a quick
>verify of it, then label the code.  I used to label, then build, and had
>some surprises hit me during the build/verify.
>
>I should update the contributor's guide to spell out how to perform a build;
>I've recently checked in the necessary build.xml script (cause I kept losing
>it!).
>
>Anyway, last message for a while, I'm off to Sugarloaf/USA!
>
>Howard
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[email protected]>
>To: "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <[email protected]>
>Cc: "Mindbridge" <mindbridgeweb-/[email protected]>; "Tapestry Contrib"
><tapestry-contrib-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
>Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:19 AM
>Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: a couple of quick questions
>
>
>  
>
>>Just a suggestion.  I suggest CVS Branches as preferrable to code
>>freezes.  You still need a code freeze just it only needs to last 5
>>minutes or so.
>>
>>Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I think with all the shuffling of components around, we should do
>>>another beta to ensure things are shaken out.  I think that beta
>>>should be a code freeze as well, and we should try to get to a release
>>>candidate.
>>>
>>>I haven't stumbled over this problem with name/qualifiedName yet.  As
>>>long as
>>>1) You don't break the demos
>>>2) You don't break the test suite
>>>3) You extend the test suite to excercise the new code (as simple as
>>>creating some pages that displays their name and pageName).
>>>
>>>I'm perfectly good with things.
>>>
>>>I'm going on a ski trip and will be out of the loop (no e-mail) until
>>>friday.  I would suggest you put together whatever code you want over
>>>the next few days and we can catch up, and vote on the next steps,
>>>      
>>>
>friday.
>  
>
>>>Howard
>>>
>>>
>>>    ----- Original Message -----
>>>    *From:* Mindbridge <mailto:mindbridgeweb-/[email protected]>
>>>    *To:* Howard M. Lewis Ship <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>    *Sent:* Sunday, December 22, 2002 8:16 AM
>>>    *Subject:* a couple of quick questions
>>>
>>>    Hi Howard,
>>>
>>>    Will there be a new beta because of the getQualifiedName() issue?
>>>
>>>    I am asking because I would like to check in some major changes I
>>>    have done with the Table's column rendering (backward compatible
>>>    ones), and I am not sure that would be a good idea if there is no
>>>    another beta. What do you think? This should have been ready
>>>    earlier, but I did not like the previous design of the changes and
>>>    sat back at drawing board.
>>>
>>>    With respect to getQualifiedName(), I personally think that it is
>>>    a showstopper, but that it will be very easy fix using the
>>>    renaming (having getName() and getPageName() instead of
>>>    getQualifiedName() and getName()). If you want, I can do that --
>>>    it is a relatively simple matter, and will affect (directly or
>>>    indirectly) very little code. The alternative way (implementing
>>>    the current specs) would definitely require your attention, I
>>>    think, since it has far reaching implications.
>>>
>>>    Best regards for now,
>>>    -mb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
>>Welcome to geek heaven.
>>http://thinkgeek.com/sf
>>_______________________________________________
>>Tapestry-contrib mailing list
>>Tapestry-contrib-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-contrib
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
>Welcome to geek heaven.
>http://thinkgeek.com/sf
>_______________________________________________
>Tapestry-contrib mailing list
>Tapestry-contrib-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-contrib
>
>  
>





-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf