Re: Add active contributors to the JIRA xap-developers group

[Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>]

On 11/29/06, Scott Boyd <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose adding the following to the JIRA xap-developers
> group.  They have been filing and/or fixing a lot of defects recently
> and it would good to have them updating the status.
>
> trevdak - Trevor Oldak
> mattcarbone - Matt Carbone
> rgagne - Rob Gagne

This seems reasonable to me.  I've seen several +1s; does anyone out
there have any concerns?  Martin had a question that appears to have
been answered (Martin, correct me if I'm wrong.).

I'd require a higher standard for committership (along the lines of
what Martin was pointing out), but, personally, I think a project
should be able to come up with any standard they like for Jira access,
as long as that standard is applied consistently/non-discriminatingly.

As a project mentor with Jira admin access, I'll add these three folks
in a couple days if there appears to still be consensus to do so.

Cliff

RE: MCO loading and IE

[Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com>]

This is a good change - with this change, developers don't need to worry
about importing JavaScript files, which are being loaded automatically
by XAP. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Margaris [mailto:jmargaris@nexaweb.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:19 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: MCO loading and IE
> 
> I made changes recently to the samples to load MCOs through the XML
files
> and eval() rather than including them in the surrounding HTML file.
> However there is one caveat here I forgot to mention. There is a
different
> between doing:
> 
> function MyClass(){}
> 
> and
> 
> MyClass = function(){}
> 
> 
> 
> In InternetExplorer only the second one works, the first one has some
> scoping issues and after the eval call the MyClass class will not be
> defined.
> 
> I am changing the samples to reflect this, I neglected to do that when
I
> first made the change.
> 
> 
> 
> James Margaris

MCO loading and IE

[James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>]

I made changes recently to the samples to load MCOs through the XML files and eval() rather than including them in the surrounding HTML file. However there is one caveat here I forgot to mention. There is a different between doing:

function MyClass(){}

and 

MyClass = function(){}

 

In InternetExplorer only the second one works, the first one has some scoping issues and after the eval call the MyClass class will not be defined.

I am changing the samples to reflect this, I neglected to do that when I first made the change.

 

James Margaris

splitPane renaming

[James Margaris <jm...@nexaweb.com>]

Into horizontalSplitPane and verticalSplitPane, to be in line with other containers.

Re: Add active contributors to the JIRA xap-developers group

[Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>]

On 12/4/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/29/06, Scott Boyd <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to propose adding the following to the JIRA xap-developers
> > group.  They have been filing and/or fixing a lot of defects recently
> > and it would good to have them updating the status.
> >
> > trevdak - Trevor Oldak
> > mattcarbone - Matt Carbone
> > rgagne - Rob Gagne
>
> This seems reasonable to me.  I've seen several +1s; does anyone out
> there have any concerns?  Martin had a question that appears to have
> been answered (Martin, correct me if I'm wrong.).


You are correct. I had searched the archives, but it appears that some of
the relevant contributions (e.g. those listed by Scott) were committed
without attribution - something I might suggest being more vigilant about in
the future. But as I said, I don't have an issue with granting these folks
xap-developers karma in JIRA.

--
Martin Cooper


I'd require a higher standard for committership (along the lines of
> what Martin was pointing out), but, personally, I think a project
> should be able to come up with any standard they like for Jira access,
> as long as that standard is applied consistently/non-discriminatingly.
>
> As a project mentor with Jira admin access, I'll add these three folks
> in a couple days if there appears to still be consensus to do so.
>
> Cliff
>

Re: Add active contributors to the JIRA xap-developers group

[Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>]

On 12/4/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/06, Scott Boyd <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to propose adding the following to the JIRA xap-developers
> > group.  They have been filing and/or fixing a lot of defects recently
> > and it would good to have them updating the status.
> >
> > trevdak - Trevor Oldak
> > mattcarbone - Matt Carbone
> > rgagne - Rob Gagne
>
> This seems reasonable to me.  I've seen several +1s; does anyone out
> there have any concerns?  Martin had a question that appears to have
> been answered (Martin, correct me if I'm wrong.).
>
> I'd require a higher standard for committership (along the lines of
> what Martin was pointing out), but, personally, I think a project
> should be able to come up with any standard they like for Jira access,
> as long as that standard is applied consistently/non-discriminatingly.
>
> As a project mentor with Jira admin access, I'll add these three folks
> in a couple days if there appears to still be consensus to do so.

Seeing a general consensus to do this, I have just added all three to
the xap-developers jira group.

Cliff

RE: Add active contributors to the JIRA xap-developers group

[Coach Wei <co...@nexaweb.com>]

+1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cliff Schmidt [mailto:cliffschmidt@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 6:07 PM
> To: xap-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Add active contributors to the JIRA xap-developers group
> 
> On 11/29/06, Scott Boyd <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to propose adding the following to the JIRA xap-developers
> > group.  They have been filing and/or fixing a lot of defects
recently
> > and it would good to have them updating the status.
> >
> > trevdak - Trevor Oldak
> > mattcarbone - Matt Carbone
> > rgagne - Rob Gagne
> 
> This seems reasonable to me.  I've seen several +1s; does anyone out
> there have any concerns?  Martin had a question that appears to have
> been answered (Martin, correct me if I'm wrong.).
> 
> I'd require a higher standard for committership (along the lines of
> what Martin was pointing out), but, personally, I think a project
> should be able to come up with any standard they like for Jira access,
> as long as that standard is applied consistently/non-discriminatingly.
> 
> As a project mentor with Jira admin access, I'll add these three folks
> in a couple days if there appears to still be consensus to do so.
> 
> Cliff