Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31712 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2004 14:55:50 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Apr 2004 14:55:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 9507 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2004 14:55:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 9484 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2004 14:55:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 9451 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2004 14:55:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.s-und-n.de) (212.8.217.2) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Apr 2004 14:55:40 -0000 Received: from notes.sundn.de (ntsrv5.sundn.de [10.10.2.10]) by mail.s-und-n.de (postfix) with ESMTP id ACD3619F64C for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:55:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hw0386 ([10.10.2.68]) by notes.sundn.de (Lotus Domino Release 6.5) with ESMTP id 2004042816481878-4096 ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:48:18 +0200 From: "Carsten Ziegeler" To: Subject: RE: npe with portal block sample. Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:58:15 +0200 Organization: S&N AG MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcQtLrkTqWIfhyLAT+K0edsQQXd+0gAAgaNg X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 6.5|September 26, 2003) at 28.04.2004 16:48:18, Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 6.5|September 26, 2003) at 28.04.2004 16:48:19, Serialize complete at 28.04.2004 16:48:19 Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: roy huang [mailto:lingererhuang@hotmail.com] > > If you use the two same coplet in the same tab ,delete one > of then will result an error said can't find the coplet (the > coplet having been delete).I believe is the same coplet but > have not been deleted result this. Should it produce a better > message or just keep or both delete the coplet? > WDYT? > Do you mean, you're using the sample coplet instance in one tab? I think this is a bug as well :( - Currently, if you remove a coplet, the instance is removed as well regardless if the instance might be used in any other place! So, actually a check should be applied to only delete the instance when it's unused. As a workaround, you can use two different instances of the same coplet (which is imho the correct way). Carsten