6 May
2008
6 May
'08
5:04 p.m.
Hi devs,
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1809
Also we need to verify that the Lucene plugin works fine and doesn't
throw any error when we start XE and leave it running for a few
minutes as it used to do (I think Sergiu fixed this).
Anyone knows of any crucial outstanding issue for 1.4RC1? Note that
RC1 means that it's a release candidate for being promoted to 1.4
final in a few days if its stable enough.
The release was planned for last Friday so we need to set a new
release date (tomorrow would be great). I'll let Thomas propose a date.
Thanks
-Vincent
6 May
6 May
5:24 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
Why is 2274 so important?
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1809
Also we need to verify that the Lucene plugin works fine and doesn't
throw any error when we start XE and leave it running for a few
minutes as it used to do (I think Sergiu fixed this).
Nope, there are still errors, but from another source, and I don't know
why yet. It looks like a shared hibernate session, but that can't be true...
Anyone knows of any crucial outstanding issue for
1.4RC1? Note that
RC1 means that it's a release candidate for being promoted to 1.4
final in a few days if its stable enough.
The release was planned for last Friday so we need to set a new
release date (tomorrow would be great). I'll let Thomas propose a date.
Thanks
-Vincent
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
7 May
7 May
11:25 a.m.
Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Vincent Massol wrote:
I think it is not important. We have fast DocumentArchive, so deactivate
document versioning is much less useful than deactivate attachment versioning.
And it is not so easy to implement without breaking of DocumentArchive.
I don't find a good solution yet.
So I think 2274 should be moved to 1.5.
--
Artem Melentyev
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne
has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
Why is 2274 so important? 
12:31 p.m.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Artem Melentyev <amelentev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Fine with me but shouldn't we revert the changes made in 1.4 for this also ?
Vincent Massol wrote:
I think it is not important. We have fast DocumentArchive, so deactivate
document versioning is much less useful than deactivate attachment versioning.
And it is not so easy to implement without breaking of DocumentArchive.
I don't find a good solution yet.
So I think 2274 should be moved to 1.5. Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne
has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
Why is 2274 so important?
--
Artem Melentyev
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
2:19 p.m.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Artem Melentyev
<amelentev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Forget what I just said about reverting. Anyway if it's really takes
too many time to fix it I'm agree to move it to 1.5
Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Fine with me but shouldn't we revert the changes made in 1.4 for this also ?
Vincent Massol wrote:
I think it is not important. We have fast DocumentArchive, so deactivate
document versioning is much less useful than deactivate attachment versioning.
And it is not so easy to implement without breaking of DocumentArchive.
I don't find a good solution yet.
So I think 2274 should be moved to 1.5. Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne
has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
Why is 2274 so important?
--
Artem Melentyev
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
6 May
6 May
5:47 p.m.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi devs,
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1809
I'm adding http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2365 which is very
important for upgrades
Also we need to verify that the Lucene plugin works fine and doesn't
throw any error when we start XE and leave it running for a few
minutes as it used to do (I think Sergiu fixed this).
Anyone knows of any crucial outstanding issue for 1.4RC1? Note that
RC1 means that it's a release candidate for being promoted to 1.4
final in a few days if its stable enough.
The release was planned for last Friday so we need to set a new
release date (tomorrow would be great). I'll let Thomas propose a date.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
7 May
7 May
12:43 a.m.
one note: I have found a bug in my new Velocity code that I need to
fix before we release 1.4RC1.
The pb is when we use a custom skin defined in a wiki page. It fails
in that case. I'm working on a fix but since I'm at Javaone it's going
to take a bit longer for me to commit the fix. I hope to have it
before tomorrow morning.
Thanks
-Vincent
On May 6, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne has kindly accepted
to become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I
think the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1809
Also we need to verify that the Lucene plugin works fine and doesn't
throw any error when we start XE and leave it running for a few
minutes as it used to do (I think Sergiu fixed this).
Anyone knows of any crucial outstanding issue for 1.4RC1? Note that
RC1 means that it's a release candidate for being promoted to 1.4
final in a few days if its stable enough.
The release was planned for last Friday so we need to set a new
release date (tomorrow would be great). I'll let Thomas propose a
date.
Thanks
-Vincent
1:58 a.m.
Hi devs,
Since JV and I are at Javaone, Thomas Mortagne has kindly accepted to
become the release manager for XE 1.4RC1.
I've quickly reviewed the jira list of outstanding issues and I think
the following should be fixed before the RC1 release:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2274
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1809
Also we need to verify that the Lucene plugin works fine and doesn't
throw any error when we start XE and leave it running for a few
minutes as it used to do (I think Sergiu fixed this).
Anyone knows of any crucial outstanding issue for 1.4RC1? Note that
RC1 means that it's a release candidate for being promoted to 1.4
final in a few days if its stable enough.
Not really an outstanding issue but...
I am planning to have the next XWatch release based on XWiki 1.4 and,
because of GWT's problems with browser standards mode rendering, I need a
method to remove the document type declaration in the standard xwiki
pages. The simplest solution would be to add a parameter to handle the
declaration in htmlheader.vm. Now, since Watch is deployed as a xar, I
cannot do that watch-specific and I need it in platform-web. The specific
issue bothering me is at: http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWATCH-104 .
WDYT?
Is it ok to allow the users to request a page with a specific doctype? Is
it ok to do it this way? (the cleaner solution, but harder to implement,
would be to have the doctype specified at content render time e.g.
$response.setDoctype("standard"))
If all above true, can we have this in 1.4?
Happy coding,
Anca Luca
The release was planned for last Friday so we need to set a new
release date (tomorrow would be great). I'll let Thomas propose a date.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
13 May
13 May
2:30 p.m.
ancapaula.luca(a)xwiki.com wrote:
Not really an outstanding issue but...
I am planning to have the next XWatch release based on XWiki 1.4 and,
because of GWT's problems with browser standards mode rendering, I need a
method to remove the document type declaration in the standard xwiki
pages. The simplest solution would be to add a parameter to handle the
declaration in htmlheader.vm. Now, since Watch is deployed as a xar, I
cannot do that watch-specific and I need it in platform-web. The specific
issue bothering me is at: http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWATCH-104 .
WDYT?
Is it ok to allow the users to request a page with a specific doctype? Is
it ok to do it this way? (the cleaner solution, but harder to implement,
would be to have the doctype specified at content render time e.g.
$response.setDoctype("standard"))
If all above true, can we have this in 1.4?
For the moment I committed the fastest, simplest, least dangerous
solution, which is to skip the doctype completely when using
noDoctype=true in the request URL.
I don't really see a need for many doctypes, as htmlheader is supposed
to be used only with HTML, and we should really encourage users to write
XHTML strict compliant code (dream on...). We'll see if we need custom
doctypes in htmlheader when html5 and xhtml2 are out and usable.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
6023
days inactive
6030
days old
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
ancapaula.luca＠xwiki.com -
Artem Melentyev -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol