Mailing-List: contact click-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: click-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of
 gcwcd-click-development-2@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted
 sender)
To: click-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: Joseph Schmidt <joseph_schmidt71@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: State of many issues?
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:06:47 +0200
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <gt3sjj$hsq$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <1239807841375-2639317.post@n2.nabble.com>
	 <gt2ll7$v5r$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <525d8e10904261644l2dd79dd2yaa23eefacbba40b5@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
In-Reply-To: <525d8e10904261644l2dd79dd2yaa23eefacbba40b5@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>

> Thanks for compiling this list. 
You are welcome.

> Some of the remaining issues need more
> consideration.
Well, I think many of them could be quickly closed if the community
has nothing against. Maybe this list could be sent to the User list
too, and if there are no concerns ...

> I will look at progressing the Click Examples to include Cayenne 3.0
The patch from Adrian does the work - I'm using it already.

thanks,
Joseph.

>>> It looks like many issues could be quickly closed because of :existing
>>> patch, or issue being too old or obsolete or problem that can't be
>>> reproduced.
>>>
>>> Here's a chronological order of some of them :
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-61
>>>  This problem can be reproduced, but not sure if it can be fixed at all.
>>> The click js check is using keycodes, but they vary from layout to layout,
>>> so I guess there'll always be a layout where the user can enter invalid
>>> characters, or they simply won't work.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-94
>>>  I guess this has nothing to do with Click.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-140
>>>  Issue can't be implemented. No author feedback exists. Also Joda-time
>>> won't make it into JDK7 neither.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-167
>>>  Apply the patch? (old sf.net patch)
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-174
>>>  Apply the patch? (old sf.net patch)
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-191
>>>  Obsolete. Maybe issue + patch should be migrated to
>>> http://code.google.com/p/click-calendar/ ?
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-223
>>>  Not an issue.
>>>
>>> -https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-229
>>>  Can't reproduce.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-258
>>>  Not a Click issue, but a servlet container one.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-266
>>>  Obsolete. Maybe issue + patch should be migrated to
>>> http://code.google.com/p/click-calendar/ too?
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-296
>>>  Table is a complicated component, so Format should be used inside of
>>> Decorator.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-306
>>>  -1 for this too.
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-397
>>>  Already fixed?
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-399
>>>  Apply (patch) snippet.
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-404
>>>  Apply code from attachment?
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-421
>>>  Apply patch? (I'm using the component myself now - but with a local patch
>>> :( )
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-505
>>>  Apply patch (I'm using the component myself now - but with a local patch
>>> :( )
>>>
>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-516
>>>  Apply patch. I'm using the click-examples myself allot with this patch
>>> locally since I can follow simply with the debugger.
>>>
>>> So I think the above issues could be quickly closed, thus making a big
>>> cleanup in JIRA :).
>>>
>>> Also, more other issues have patches, so I think they should be analyzed
>>> and applied too before it's too late (and are not good anymore because of
>>> refactorings).

>