|
»
»
»
« Return to Thread: [Trinidad] added browser version support in skinning TRINIDAD-799
Re: [Trinidad] added browser version support in skinning TRINIDAD-799
by Matthias Wessendorf-4
::
Rate this Message:
> MyFaces Core and the Portlet Bridge have an API policy in that the API is
> dictated by a Portlet Bridge spec. They don't have any guidelines in IMPL
yeah, spec impls (at least their APIs don't count).
It's time for a new lifecycle phase... :D
> though. I think the majority of the projects rely on the committeers to
> review and test any additions.
yeah, less or more. Maven is pretty picky, so is Lucene.
But at the old job, we never had issues with incompatibility with
Lucene updates.
> But like Matthias said, it's a good idea to bring it up in an email. Stuff
> tends to be better when the community is involved.
yeah, jira is a bad discussion platform (at least for me)
-Matthias
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Andy Schwartz
> > <andy.g.schwartz@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Andrew Robinson
> > > <andrew.rw.robinson@...> wrote:
> > > > I would like to have:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Major and Major.Minor support
> > > > 2) A syntax that is already supported by CSS @ styles in at least
> one
> > > > browser or as close as we can come
> > > > 3) Range, greater than and less than if possible
> > >
> > > These all sound good to me. The underlying style handling layer (the
> > > old XSS stuff) was never designed to support #1 or #3, but think it
> > > would be worthwhile to see what we can do to address these.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > #2 I think is really important so that skinning feels familiar to
> CSS
> > > > developers.
> > > >
> > > > If the solution meets those needs, I will be very happy, but others
> > > > can decide on the exact syntax, I'm flexible
> > >
> > > I've got a process question here, which I am a bit hesitant to ask
> > > given our recent "discussions", but, well, what the heck... Shouldn't
> > > we be discussing/reviewing such requirements/API additions before the
> > > changes are committed to the trunks? Not that I am not grateful that
> > >
> > >
> >
> > at least (I personally think) having a "I am about to commit this" is not
> a
> > bad thing (tm)
> >
> >
> >
> > > Cristi has invested the time on providing a solution (thanks for doing
> > > this Cristi!). I am just wondering whether in general it would be
> > > better to review/agree on new APIs before they get committed.
> > >
> > > Does Trinidad (or MyFaces) have any policy/guidelines on how new
> > > API/feature additions should be handled? Not picking on Cristi here -
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Nope. Not that I know. Some other Apache projects have; some not.
> > I think that for adding new APIs, we might want that we at least get
> > an alert before :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I recently added some new skinning features myself and wasn't sure
> > > whether there were some specific steps that I needed to follow.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > haven't you ping the mailing list? If not, go ahead !
> >
> > If it is just still in jira, well... it can be
> > there for a while. Bug trackers aren't that cool for discussions. Mailing
> > list are (I hate forums)
> >
> > -M
> >
> >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> dictated by a Portlet Bridge spec. They don't have any guidelines in IMPL
yeah, spec impls (at least their APIs don't count).
It's time for a new lifecycle phase... :D
> though. I think the majority of the projects rely on the committeers to
> review and test any additions.
yeah, less or more. Maven is pretty picky, so is Lucene.
But at the old job, we never had issues with incompatibility with
Lucene updates.
> But like Matthias said, it's a good idea to bring it up in an email. Stuff
> tends to be better when the community is involved.
yeah, jira is a bad discussion platform (at least for me)
-Matthias
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Andy Schwartz
> > <andy.g.schwartz@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Andrew Robinson
> > > <andrew.rw.robinson@...> wrote:
> > > > I would like to have:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Major and Major.Minor support
> > > > 2) A syntax that is already supported by CSS @ styles in at least
> one
> > > > browser or as close as we can come
> > > > 3) Range, greater than and less than if possible
> > >
> > > These all sound good to me. The underlying style handling layer (the
> > > old XSS stuff) was never designed to support #1 or #3, but think it
> > > would be worthwhile to see what we can do to address these.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > #2 I think is really important so that skinning feels familiar to
> CSS
> > > > developers.
> > > >
> > > > If the solution meets those needs, I will be very happy, but others
> > > > can decide on the exact syntax, I'm flexible
> > >
> > > I've got a process question here, which I am a bit hesitant to ask
> > > given our recent "discussions", but, well, what the heck... Shouldn't
> > > we be discussing/reviewing such requirements/API additions before the
> > > changes are committed to the trunks? Not that I am not grateful that
> > >
> > >
> >
> > at least (I personally think) having a "I am about to commit this" is not
> a
> > bad thing (tm)
> >
> >
> >
> > > Cristi has invested the time on providing a solution (thanks for doing
> > > this Cristi!). I am just wondering whether in general it would be
> > > better to review/agree on new APIs before they get committed.
> > >
> > > Does Trinidad (or MyFaces) have any policy/guidelines on how new
> > > API/feature additions should be handled? Not picking on Cristi here -
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Nope. Not that I know. Some other Apache projects have; some not.
> > I think that for adding new APIs, we might want that we at least get
> > an alert before :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I recently added some new skinning features myself and wasn't sure
> > > whether there were some specific steps that I needed to follow.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > haven't you ping the mailing list? If not, go ahead !
> >
> > If it is just still in jira, well... it can be
> > there for a while. Bug trackers aren't that cool for discussions. Mailing
> > list are (I hate forums)
> >
> > -M
> >
> >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
« Return to Thread: [Trinidad] added browser version support in skinning TRINIDAD-799
| Free Forum Powered by Nabble | Forum Help |