Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4592FBBC.1010601@wfscorp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:03:24 -0500
From: Musachy Barroso <mbarroso@wfscorp.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [ajaxtags] Date picker
References: <4592C00B.8050506@wfscorp.com>
	 <8b3ce3790612271144y3d940a7ak3793d011a79d73e0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4592D96E.3020808@wfscorp.com>
 <8b3ce3790612271329u468aa118w8dc082afca0bbfda@mail.gmail.com>
 <4592F479.8000605@wfscorp.com> <4592FA3A.8010206@twdata.org>
In-Reply-To: <4592FA3A.8010206@twdata.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I didn't know about that. In that case, why bother with WW-1555 at all? 
Why don we keep it the way they are now, and just document how to 
migrate from the WW ones?

musachy

//what about the ajax plugin spin off??

Don Brown wrote:
> The old WW date picker tags are very different than the Dojo ones.  
> The problem is that the old tags used an LGPL Javascript library, so 
> they had to be replaced.  Therefore, it really isn't possible to keep 
> backwards compatibility here with the old WW tags.  The situation is 
> similar with the rich text editor tag.  Another reason I thought now 
> might be a good time to restructure the ajax tags to pull out tags 
> like the date picker and rich text editor into their own tag in a new 
> tag library.
>
> Don
>
> Musachy Barroso wrote:
>> The problem with the datepicker is worst than I thought, Dojo's 
>> DatePicker and TimePicker are way different that the ones that WW 
>> had. In order too keep it backward compatible, the best thing we can 
>> do is resurrect the "DatePicker.js" and "TimePicker.js" from WW, 
>> instead of using Dojo directly, like we do now. I will start to dig 
>> back and get the old files.
>>
>> musachy
>>
>>
>> Ted Husted wrote:
>>> OK, it's in r490569
>>>
>>> Any feedback on WW-1573 -  Handling of If-Modified-Since header for
>>> static content
>>>
>>> Should we apply that too?
>>>
>>> -Ted.
>>>
>>> On 12/27/06, Musachy Barroso <mbarroso@wfscorp.com> wrote:
>>>> When you apply the one for the autocompleter; I will create one for
>>>> datepicker against head svn, and we'll just ignore the old one.
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> musachy
>>>>
>>>> Ted Husted wrote:
>>>> > I tried to apply the patch, but there were a great many conflicts,
>>>> > perhaps because of other changes.  I'm happy to apply as many 
>>>> patches
>>>> > as we need to bring the Ajax theme up to speed, but I don't know 
>>>> dojo
>>>> > well enough to resolve conflucts with overlapping changes.
>>>> >
>>>> > -Ted.
>>>> >
>>>> > On 12/27/06, Musachy Barroso <mbarroso@wfscorp.com> wrote:
>>>> >> It seems like the patch for reverting the datepicker to its old 
>>>> name was
>>>> >> never applied. (https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-1555) 
>>>> Does
>>>> >> any one know what is the status of this one?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> regards
>>>> >> musachy
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org