Dojo 0.4.0 ? (was Re: InputSuggestAjax with client side state saving)

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

Hi Werner,

I understand your points.

I am wondering, why this was not discussed, or did I just miss the thread?
I saw your emails in the past on dojo integration, but nothing on a
topic like "should we introduce dojo 0.4".

Thanks to SVN blame (Revision: 473277) I couldn't find a jira issue for that...
We should at least log stuff like that to jira, not only to be able to
put some comments to the release notes.

Would be great to have a discussion/comments/votes on updates like that.

Please try to keep those basic rules in mind for the future.

Thanks,
Matthias

BTW. what is myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/core/src/main/resources/org/apache/myfaces/custom/dojo/resource/Storage_version6.swf

Does dojo now need swf files? Are swf files (binary) fine with the ASF
license rules?



On 11/17/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
> Werner Punz schrieb:
> > Gerald Müllan schrieb:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> well, the dojo guys changed from version 0.3.1 to 0.4 not that long
> >> time ago but we are still using 0.3.1. We agreed to only migrate to a
> >> more recent version until some time has come
> >> (For about 1-2 months).
> >>
> > The 0.4.0 upgrade wont happen, there are some issues which were
> > triggered on one of my testsite, which I had migrated to dojo 0.4 which
> > caused
> > the ie to crash it is more likely that i will target 0.4.1 directly.
> > (The bug has been reported)
> >
>
> Ok Gerald just notified me, that the upgrade was done about a week ago
> by someone else, so it seems we are on 0.4, that explains a few issues i
> had with custom components, which i was aware of of having to change
> them before the upgrade (in one case I did the work upfront and
> committed it to the dojo people).
>
> Anyway, it is done now, I am not going to revert it unless there
> are serious issues (mainly the ie problem I had in my case).
>
> But please next time before doing something major like this,
> open a discussion, I am doing some work behind the scenes, mainly
> testing, before getting ready to upgrade. This 0.4 upgrade could cause
> some troubles for some users having to rely on IE6.
>
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Dojo 0.4.0 ? (was Re: InputSuggestAjax with client side state saving)

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

I know. I didn't say that.

svn blame is smart :)

On 11/21/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the record: it wasn't Werner who did the update.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 11/17/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Anyway, the update is done,  +1 for leaving the codebase in unless
> > > something serious arises. I just would have preferred to have it the
> > > usual way with a voting upfront, I want to avoid situations where we
> > > have it in and I cannot test upfront or have tested upfront and am aware
> > > of showstoppers which could cause major problems.
> > > This also would give the other component devs some time to adjust their
> > > components to api changes (there have been a few) upfront without
> > > running into bug reports later on.
> >
> > right, nobody (or at least I) will remove the code, just to give a
> > hint that we like to have a discussion before major updates like
> > that...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Dojo 0.4.0 ? (was Re: InputSuggestAjax with client side state saving)

[Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>]

For the record: it wasn't Werner who did the update.

regards,

Martin

On 11/17/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Anyway, the update is done,  +1 for leaving the codebase in unless
> > something serious arises. I just would have preferred to have it the
> > usual way with a voting upfront, I want to avoid situations where we
> > have it in and I cannot test upfront or have tested upfront and am aware
> > of showstoppers which could cause major problems.
> > This also would give the other component devs some time to adjust their
> > components to api changes (there have been a few) upfront without
> > running into bug reports later on.
>
> right, nobody (or at least I) will remove the code, just to give a
> hint that we like to have a discussion before major updates like
> that...
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Dojo 0.4.0 ? (was Re: InputSuggestAjax with client side state saving)

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

> Anyway, the update is done,  +1 for leaving the codebase in unless
> something serious arises. I just would have preferred to have it the
> usual way with a voting upfront, I want to avoid situations where we
> have it in and I cannot test upfront or have tested upfront and am aware
> of showstoppers which could cause major problems.
> This also would give the other component devs some time to adjust their
> components to api changes (there have been a few) upfront without
> running into bug reports later on.

right, nobody (or at least I) will remove the code, just to give a
hint that we like to have a discussion before major updates like
that...

Thanks!


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Dojo 0.4.0 ? (was Re: InputSuggestAjax with client side state saving)

[Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at>]

Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> Hi Werner,
> 
> I understand your points.
> 
> I am wondering, why this was not discussed, or did I just miss the thread?
> I saw your emails in the past on dojo integration, but nothing on a
> topic like "should we introduce dojo 0.4".
> 

> Thanks to SVN blame (Revision: 473277) I couldn't find a jira issue for
> that...
> We should at least log stuff like that to jira, not only to be able to
> put some comments to the release notes.
> 
> Would be great to have a discussion/comments/votes on updates like that.
> 
> Please try to keep those basic rules in mind for the future.
> 
> Thanks,
> Matthias
> 
> BTW. what is
> myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/core/src/main/resources/org/apache/myfaces/custom/dojo/resource/Storage_version6.swf
> 
> 
> Does dojo now need swf files? Are swf files (binary) fine with the ASF
> license rules?
> 
Ahm sorry to intercept here, the swf file is a dojo related thing. I
have not looked to deeply into it yet (it is #2 on my todo list
regarding dojo) i suspect it is one of the dojo internal data transport
layers or svg related, but not sure yet. I assume the file itself is in
a bsd licence like dojo itself, but I want to get rid of it anyway for
one reason or the other (the file has caused problems regarding logs etc...)

As for the swf format, dont know, but I am quite confident that we can
eliminate it without any huge hazzles from the codebase if needed.

Anyway, the update is done,  +1 for leaving the codebase in unless
something serious arises. I just would have preferred to have it the
usual way with a voting upfront, I want to avoid situations where we
have it in and I cannot test upfront or have tested upfront and am aware
of showstoppers which could cause major problems.
This also would give the other component devs some time to adjust their
components to api changes (there have been a few) upfront without
running into bug reports later on.