You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Peter Ertl <pe...@gmx.org> on 2012/05/06 01:07:27 UTC
Re: wicket-4532 please review
right, it's 453-2- :-)
Am 05.05.2012 um 20:14 schrieb Sven Meier:
> We're probably talking about WICKET-453*2*, IMHO it can still be improved for the next 6.0 beta.
>
> Sven
>
> On 05/05/2012 07:00 PM, Emond Papegaaij wrote:
>> The ticket you mentioned is already fixed in 6.0. I fixed it right after
>> filing it.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Emond
>> Op 5 mei 2012 14:16 schreef "Peter Ertl"<pe...@gmx.org> het volgende:
>>
>>> Hi wicket team,
>>>
>>> I would like to fix WICKET-4533 but 6.0.0 is darn close. So could you
>>> possibly take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4533and tell me if it will be okay to commit the patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks and best regards
>>> Peter
>
Re: wicket-4532 please review
Posted by Peter Ertl <pe...@gmx.org>.
so, this time with the correct link
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4532
let me know what you think :-)
Am 06.05.2012 um 01:07 schrieb Peter Ertl:
> right, it's 453-2- :-)
>
>
> Am 05.05.2012 um 20:14 schrieb Sven Meier:
>
>> We're probably talking about WICKET-453*2*, IMHO it can still be improved for the next 6.0 beta.
>>
>> Sven
>>
>> On 05/05/2012 07:00 PM, Emond Papegaaij wrote:
>>> The ticket you mentioned is already fixed in 6.0. I fixed it right after
>>> filing it.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Emond
>>> Op 5 mei 2012 14:16 schreef "Peter Ertl"<pe...@gmx.org> het volgende:
>>>
>>>> Hi wicket team,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to fix WICKET-4533 but 6.0.0 is darn close. So could you
>>>> possibly take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4533and tell me if it will be okay to commit the patch?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and best regards
>>>> Peter
>>
>