You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Robin Wyles <ro...@robinwyles.com> on 2008/08/21 11:08:05 UTC
Re: CForms and Dojo
Hi,
Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I
can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs
when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo
1.1 resolves these.
Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?
Many thanks,
Robin
On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:
>
> Hi Chris!
>
> Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is
> doing that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great,
> if you could join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated
> into the next cocoon release :-)
>
> greets,
> Gabriel
> ______________________
> Gabriel Gruber
> Senior Consultant
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien
>
>
>
> "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 12.06.2008 09:54
> Please respond to
> users@cocoon.apache.org
>
> To
> <us...@cocoon.apache.org>
> cc
> Subject
> CForms and Dojo
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of
> dojo used for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since
> my current application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff
> and I was sort of annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and
> 1.1 together, I started creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which
> does the same as the original cocoon version, instead it uses dojo
> 1.1 with all its advanced features. It is currently working nicely.
>
> Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If
> yes, it might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it
> to the cocoon guys (It looks a lot nicer).
>
> While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of
> the validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be
> great if this information was forwarded here, cause I could
> additionally use the Dojo client-side validation in addition to the
> server-side validation of CForms (I know this doesn’t work for all
> validators) reducing some client-server-roundtrips.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> [ C h r i s t o f e r D u t z ]
>
> C-Ware IT-Service
> Inhaber
> Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
> Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt
>
> fon: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
> fax: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
> mobil: 0171 / 7 444 2 33
> email: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> http://www.c-ware.de
> FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581
>
>
>
>
Re: AW: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
On 21 Aug 2008, at 11:42, Robin Wyles wrote:
> Many thanks for all your replies... seems there is some enthusiasm
> for this after all! Once Jeremy's work is accessible somewhere I'd
> be happy to help with any further work that needs to be done.
>
> Chris: I would love to see your xslt, just so I can see if my widget
> in a repeater woes are solved by dojo 1.1.
The Repeater Widget in the new CForms has been completely re-written.
Widgets in Repeaters work well (of course :)
As a taster, here is some of the new functionality :
Repeaters gracefully upgrade from their simplest 'static' form
(controlled via action buttons) up to full-blown drag and drop solely
via configuration in the Model and Template. Lazy-loading of code
ensures that only the Libs required for what you need are loaded.
Some of the features of DnD :
Easy to control behaviour, enforced by the Model
Select row(s) optionally without a visible select control
Optional Select/Drag handles
DnD single or multiple rows at a time
Avatars of rows being dragged plus lots of visual feedback
No longer any need for custom handlers in your form for DnD
Control over allowing/enforcing copy or move within a Repeater or
between Repeaters
Control over what is allowed to be dragged from one Repeater to
another
Control copy/move, multi-select/deselect using typical meta-keys
Extensive visual customisation via CSS
etc. etc.
NB. You should only need to edit the templates of existing projects'
Repeaters if :
a) you were using the old DnD Widgets (where you specified the Dojo
Widget in your Template, nasty)
b) you want to use the new behaviour
I hope you will find the new Repeater to be a really powerful addition
to your webapps and I hope it was worth the wait ;)
regards
Jeremy
Re: AW: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Robin Wyles <ro...@robinwyles.com>.
Many thanks for all your replies... seems there is some enthusiasm
for this after all! Once Jeremy's work is accessible somewhere I'd be
happy to help with any further work that needs to be done.
Chris: I would love to see your xslt, just so I can see if my widget
in a repeater woes are solved by dojo 1.1.
Robin
On 21 Aug 2008, at 11:32, Christofer Dutz wrote:
> Well I can send you my Xslt, but it’s really pre-sub-
> alpha-0.0.0.0.1 Version ;-)
>
> But I am using dojo widgets in repeaters though and they work as
> they should. I can send you the file, but I’d suggest using it as
> inspiration and not for production ;-)
>
> Currently I am working myself into the mysteries of Cocoon 2.2 and
> it’s build voodoo, so I haven’t had the time to make some real
> progress here. But I am optimistic, that I will get the hang of
> C2.2 pretty soon. Jeremy is currently working on client side
> validation and Dojo 1.1 … unfortunately I haven’t had the time to
> make the changes needed for this. I promise I will do my best to do
> this next week.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Robin Wyles [mailto:rob@robinwyles.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 11:08
> An: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: CForms and Dojo
>
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere?
> I can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs
> when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if
> dojo 1.1 resolves these.
>
> Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Robin
>
> On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Chris!
>
> Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is
> doing that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great,
> if you could join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated
> into the next cocoon release :-)
>
> greets,
> Gabriel
> ______________________
> Gabriel Gruber
> Senior Consultant
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien
>
>
> "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 12.06.2008 09:54
>
> Please respond to
> users@cocoon.apache.org
> To
> <us...@cocoon.apache.org>
> cc
> Subject
> CForms and Dojo
>
>
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of
> dojo used for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since
> my current application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff
> and I was sort of annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and
> 1.1 together, I started creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which
> does the same as the original cocoon version, instead it uses dojo
> 1.1 with all its advanced features. It is currently working nicely.
>
> Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If
> yes, it might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it
> to the cocoon guys (It looks a lot nicer).
>
> While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of
> the validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be
> great if this information was forwarded here, cause I could
> additionally use the Dojo client-side validation in addition to the
> server-side validation of CForms (I know this doesn’t work for all
> validators) reducing some client-server-roundtrips.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> [ C h r i s t o f e r D u t z ]
>
> C-Ware IT-Service
> Inhaber
> Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
> Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt
>
> fon: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
> fax: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
> mobil: 0171 / 7 444 2 33
> email: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> http://www.c-ware.de
> FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581
>
>
>
>
>
AW: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Well I can send you my Xslt, but its really pre-sub-alpha-0.0.0.0.1 Version
;-)
But I am using dojo widgets in repeaters though and they work as they
should. I can send you the file, but Id suggest using it as inspiration and
not for production ;-)
Currently I am working myself into the mysteries of Cocoon 2.2 and its
build voodoo, so I havent had the time to make some real progress here. But
I am optimistic, that I will get the hang of C2.2 pretty soon. Jeremy is
currently working on client side validation and Dojo 1.1
unfortunately I
havent had the time to make the changes needed for this. I promise I will
do my best to do this next week.
Chris
Von: Robin Wyles [mailto:rob@robinwyles.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 11:08
An: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Betreff: Re: CForms and Dojo
Hi,
Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I can't
seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs when using
certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo 1.1 resolves
these.
Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?
Many thanks,
Robin
On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:
Hi Chris!
Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is doing
that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great, if you could
join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated into the next cocoon
release :-)
greets,
Gabriel
______________________
Gabriel Gruber
Senior Consultant
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien
"Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>
12.06.2008 09:54
Please respond to
users@cocoon.apache.org
To
<us...@cocoon.apache.org>
cc
Subject
CForms and Dojo
Hi there,
I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of dojo used
for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since my current
application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff and I was sort of
annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and 1.1 together, I started
creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which does the same as the original
cocoon version, instead it uses dojo 1.1 with all its advanced features. It
is currently working nicely.
Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If yes, it
might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it to the cocoon
guys (It looks a lot nicer).
While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of the
validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff
it would be great if this
information was forwarded here, cause I could additionally use the Dojo
client-side validation in addition to the server-side validation of CForms
(I know this doesnt work for all validators) reducing some
client-server-roundtrips.
Chris
[ C h r i s t o f e r D u t z ]
C-Ware IT-Service
Inhaber
Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt
fon: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
fax: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
mobil: 0171 / 7 444 2 33
email: <ma...@c-ware.de> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
<http://www.c-ware.de/> http://www.c-ware.de
FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
On 23 Aug 2008, at 15:12, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> Jeremy Quinn pisze:
>> Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?
>
> Yes, please. This new merge support requires both client and server
> of 1.5 version.
I am glad I asked (!)
>
>> Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than
>> August has been !!
>
> I'm going to Greece to sail a little bit; the weather simply must be
> good there. :-)
Lucky you!
Have a brilliant time :)
regards Jeremy
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Grzegorz Kossakowski <gr...@tuffmail.com>.
Jeremy Quinn pisze:
> Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?
Yes, please. This new merge support requires both client and server of 1.5 version.
>
> Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than August
> has been !!
I'm going to Greece to sail a little bit; the weather simply must be good there. :-)
>> Now, looking forward to your commits!
>
> Many thanks for enabling this.
>
> Even though I have been scrupulously backing up, I'll feel a lot safer
> when this enormous amount of work is in SVN!
You welcome.
--
Best regards,
Grzegorz Kossakowski
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
Hi Grzegorz
On 21 Aug 2008, at 13:36, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
>
>>> Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you
>>> should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.
>> With your help, I'd be happy to do this.
>
> I've created a branch called "BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1" based on latest
> version of 2.1 branch. It's your sandbox now and you can safely play
> around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or block
> any releases.
>
> The URL for branch is:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/
Brilliant!!
Many thanks for this.
So, I am running client SVN version 1.4.4 (r25188).
Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?
>> Lets do it !!
>> I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo
>> 1.1.1 APIs, still not quite there yet.
>> But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me
>> further, this could be a good time to get it out.
>
> Actually, now it's very easy, just switch your checkout of Cocoon's
> source code to the branch and commit your stuff there.
>
> Don't know which client for svn you are using, but from cmd line it
> would be:
> svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/
>
> (https is important here, of course)
Yes, thanks for the advice.
> I only have one ask to you:
> Could you try to commit as small changesets as possible (of course,
> not to small)? The best situation would be if one commit reflects
> one logical change (like migration of one widget to new API or
> something like that). Rule would be that one commit is big enough to
> not introduce intermediate states where state of branch is
> completely broken. So half-baked commits are bad idea.
>
> On the other hand, single commit should not contain anything more
> than is necessary to fulfill requirement outlined above.
>
> I ask you to split your work into smaller chunks because then it's
> easier to merge things in the future and it's much easier to follow
> your work and port it to trunk. However, I'm aware that when one is
> doing heavy refactorings following this rules is not always possible.
I'll do my best.
I'll start to perform the commit, very carefully, over the next couple
of days, and report back when I think it is ready for trying out.
> Last thing: descriptive commit messages. Even if that may sound
> obvious, but they are really, really needed. ;-)
> This is especially a case when someone else must keep trunk in sync
> with your work.
Of course
>> Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be
>> a big list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is
>> tested on MSIE.
>
> Here I hope that we can count on help of our community.
Me too :)
>> Cleaning up samples
>> Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
>> Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
>> Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not
>> just datatypes (as I have now)
>
> Is the last item absolutely necessary for initial release?
No it is not.
And of course, a major item I left off the list, is updating the
documentation ....
>> etc. etc.
>> There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are
>> written and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to
>> run and use it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be
>> downhill :)
>
> :)
>
>>> Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes
>>> his work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When
>>> it comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to
>>> trunk.
>> That would be great!!
>
> Even there is one caveat: for me September is going to be more or
> less free month and I plan to not touch computer too much so I could
> start with porting stuff to trunk in October.
Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than August
has been !!
> Now, looking forward to your commits!
Many thanks for enabling this.
Even though I have been scrupulously backing up, I'll feel a lot safer
when this enormous amount of work is in SVN!
best regards
Jeremy
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Alfred Nathaniel <an...@apache.org>.
On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 19:46 -0400, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
> > But in the short term, what do people prefer?
> >
> > My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar
> > (a single file in SVN)?
>
> Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside
> jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull
> then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all
> files added by the Subversion?)
+1 for the jar
That avoids also the temptation to modify the Dojo sources in our SVN.
Cheers, Alfred.
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
Thanks Vadim,
Point taken :)
regards Jeremy
On 22 Aug 2008, at 00:46, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
>> But in the short term, what do people prefer?
>>
>> My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar
>> (a single file in SVN)?
>
> Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside
> jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull
> then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all
> files added by the Subversion?)
>
> Vadim
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:
> But in the short term, what do people prefer?
>
> My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar
> (a single file in SVN)?
Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside
jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull
then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all
files added by the Subversion?)
Vadim
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
Hi All
On 21 Aug 2008, at 13:36, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
>>> Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you
>>> should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.
>> With your help, I'd be happy to do this.
>
> I've created a branch called "BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1" based on latest
> version of 2.1 branch. It's your sandbox now and you can safely play
> around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or block
> any releases.
I have a question regarding how Dojo itself should be packaged.
In 2.1.11 (and maybe 2.2) Dojo is compiled into a Jar and served via
resource://.
There is an Ant script in the Ajax block for building this.
While I have been working on 2.1.12-dev, I just made Dojo a 2.1-style
block (src/blocks/dojotoolkit), for convenience.
I have scrupulously avoided patching the Dojo Release at all, but
during development is was useful to have easy access to the source and
sometimes add debug statements etc.
What I did have to do was to rebuild Dojo's CLDR resources (equivalent
to i18n messages) to get the widest L10N support for number formatting
etc. (approx 187 variants).
This fully-expanded dev-Dojo block (4126 files!!) is very convenient
for anyone developing /CForms/ but maybe less convenient for people
developing /with/ CForms and definitely no good for going into
production.
I am confidant that between us, we can come up with a sound solution
for making a minified, packaged Dojo, Ajax and CForms release
optimised for production ..... but we still need a more complete
version for viewing the samples etc.
But in the short term, what do people prefer?
My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar (a
single file in SVN)?
Thanks for any suggestions
regards Jeremy
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Grzegorz Kossakowski <gr...@tuffmail.com>.
Hi Jeremy,
>> Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you
>> should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.
>
> With your help, I'd be happy to do this.
I've created a branch called "BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1" based on latest version of 2.1 branch. It's your
sandbox now and you can safely play around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or
block any releases.
The URL for branch is:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/
>
> Lets do it !!
> I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo 1.1.1
> APIs, still not quite there yet.
>
> But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me
> further, this could be a good time to get it out.
Actually, now it's very easy, just switch your checkout of Cocoon's source code to the branch and
commit your stuff there.
Don't know which client for svn you are using, but from cmd line it would be:
svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/
(https is important here, of course)
I only have one ask to you:
Could you try to commit as small changesets as possible (of course, not to small)? The best
situation would be if one commit reflects one logical change (like migration of one widget to new
API or something like that). Rule would be that one commit is big enough to not introduce
intermediate states where state of branch is completely broken. So half-baked commits are bad idea.
On the other hand, single commit should not contain anything more than is necessary to fulfill
requirement outlined above.
I ask you to split your work into smaller chunks because then it's easier to merge things in the
future and it's much easier to follow your work and port it to trunk. However, I'm aware that when
one is doing heavy refactorings following this rules is not always possible.
Last thing: descriptive commit messages. Even if that may sound obvious, but they are really, really
needed. ;-)
This is especially a case when someone else must keep trunk in sync with your work.
> Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be a big
> list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is tested on
> MSIE.
Here I hope that we can count on help of our community.
> Cleaning up samples
> Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
> Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
> Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not just
> datatypes (as I have now)
Is the last item absolutely necessary for initial release?
> etc. etc.
>
> There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are written
> and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to run and use
> it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be downhill :)
:)
>> Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his
>> work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When it comes
>> to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.
>
> That would be great!!
Even there is one caveat: for me September is going to be more or less free month and I plan to not
touch computer too much so I could start with porting stuff to trunk in October.
Now, looking forward to your commits!
--
Best regards,
Grzegorz Kossakowski
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
Hi Guys
Thanks for the interest
On 21 Aug 2008, at 10:47, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> Robin Wyles pisze:
>> Hi,
>> Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere?
>> I can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs
>> when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if
>> dojo 1.1 resolves these.
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> From my experience it looks like there are many people asking about
> Dojo 1.1 integration, few that seem to work on this stuff for their
> own but almost nobody that is willing to work on trunk.
The problem with working in trunk (as I saw it) was the sheer amount
of time in which cforms would have been unreleasable. Moving from 0.4
to 1.1.1 just broke absolutely everything.
> Actually, Jeremy Quinn has probably the best progress but he still
> keeps everything on his local computer to our misfortune.
Sorry, it just seemed easier :(
> Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you
> should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.
With your help, I'd be happy to do this.
> Also, even if I could assist with this process (which is very easy
> btw.) but I think it should be you who establishes the branch
> because I have no free cycles to support branch of 2.1 at the
> moment. Fortunately enough, at Apache we have Subversion 1.5
> installed so you will be able to take advantage of improved branch/
> merge support in 1.5.
Lets do it !!
I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo
1.1.1 APIs, still not quite there yet.
But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me
further, this could be a good time to get it out.
Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be a
big list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is
tested on MSIE.
Cleaning up samples
Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not
just datatypes (as I have now)
etc. etc.
There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are
written and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to run
and use it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be
downhill :)
> Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his
> work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When it
> comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.
That would be great!!
best regards
Jeremy
Re: CForms and Dojo
Posted by Grzegorz Kossakowski <gr...@tuffmail.com>.
Robin Wyles pisze:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I
> can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs when
> using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo 1.1
> resolves these.
Hi Robin,
From my experience it looks like there are many people asking about Dojo 1.1 integration, few that
seem to work on this stuff for their own but almost nobody that is willing to work on trunk.
Actually, Jeremy Quinn has probably the best progress but he still keeps everything on his local
computer to our misfortune.
Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you should branch whole 2.1 and
commit your work to your branch.
Also, even if I could assist with this process (which is very easy btw.) but I think it should be
you who establishes the branch because I have no free cycles to support branch of 2.1 at the moment.
Fortunately enough, at Apache we have Subversion 1.5 installed so you will be able to take advantage
of improved branch/merge support in 1.5.
Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his work we can all join our forces
to push things forward. When it comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.
--
Grzegorz Kossakowski