If it's just about sending stack-traces and code-snippets - I really, really promise to do it ;). I've just rewound our current project to 4.1.1, but would be happy to return to 4.1.2, if ognl worked for my core components.
Marcus > -----Original Message----- > From: Jesse Kuhnert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 4:33 PM > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: Latest OGNL 2.7-SNAPSHOT and Tapestry > > No I don't view it as complaining. Perfectly understandable. > I wish it weren't so brittle and error prone to work on. > > Have no fear though, the people currently paying my bills are > applying real pressure for this as well, so if things don't > start looking much rosier next week I'll probably enable this > fail-safe abilities but still log the exceptions somewhere in > the hopes that some kind souls occasionally report them. > (I'll probably just do a > exception.printStackTrace() in the hopes that sysout dumps > will be annoying enough to report ;) ) > > On 3/30/07, Ben Dotte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Jesse, it is reassuring to know you're making > progress and that > > you have a backup plan for things that don't work when 4.1.2 is > > released. Sorry if it sounds like I was complaining--it was just a > > little disconcerting to see so many things break moving from one > > snapshot to the next. I really don't mind tracking down and > reporting > > bugs though, it is the least the community can do to support open > > source software. Good luck with the rest of your fixes, I > don't envy > > having to work with all that bytecode enhancement stuff! > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jesse Kuhnert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:57 PM > > To: Tapestry users > > Subject: Re: Latest OGNL 2.7-SNAPSHOT and Tapestry > > > > Sorry I've been away for a couple days... > > > > I'm sure things must look very dire indeed. Though they do > appear out > > of hand right now I promise it's moving forward by leaps and bounds. > > The only crappy part is that the compiler is extremely > unforgiving, so > > the slightest slip up and you're hosed.. > > > > I do have a solution already implemented to handle "rough > edge cases" > > for expressions that won't compile but I've haven't enabled it yet > > because then no one would ever give me my much needed bug reports. > > > > I have no intention of releasing 4.1.2 with OGNL 2.7 without this > > fail-over feature enabled, but would like to give it a little more > > time before giving up on it. I'm sure my last round of changes have > > caused all manner of problems that are easily > solved..Refactoring in > > bytecode enhancements is a non trivial thing...bleh.. > > > > On 3/28/07, Ben Dotte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I would have to agree that until OGNL 2.7 is much more > stable, the > > > new Tapestry snapshots are pretty useless to us. Jesse > has been kind > > enough > > > to fix several bugs I have found in record time (thanks > Jesse!) but > > > we're still at a point where most of our pages don't work > at all yet. > > > For now I have a separate workspace devoted to testing out the > > > newest Tapestry/OGNL snapshots and I won't commit that to > our source > > > control system until most of the application works. > > > > > > If OGNL could be fixed fairly soon I'm fine with the dependency on > > 2.7. > > > But I would agree that making new Tapestry 4.1.2 snapshot > compatible > > > with OGNL 2.6 would be a nice alternative if that isn't > possible in > > the > > > short term. > > > > > > Ben > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Renat Zubairov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:07 PM > > > To: Tapestry users > > > Subject: Latest OGNL 2.7-SNAPSHOT and Tapestry > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > We have a application on Tapestry 4.1.2-SNAPSHOT and > since already a > > > month or so we have _constant_ problems in running it > (basically I > > > can't run it at all). The _only_ reasons for that is latest OGNL > > > 2.7-SNAPSHOT dependency that is not working properly (see > all bugs > > > in http://jira.opensymphony.com/browse/OGNL ). I can see > in the mail > > > list that there are some other people having the same problems. > > > I'm curious, how it is possible to fix the tapestry > version that is > > > not dependent on the latest OGNL changes? > > > Also it would be very interesting to know how close > Tapestry 4.1.2 > > > and OGNL are working together, for example may we declare > dependency > > > on Tap 4.1.2-SNAPSHOT but with OGNL-2.6? > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Renat Zubairov > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jesse Kuhnert > > Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer > > > > Open source based consulting work centered around > > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Jesse Kuhnert > Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer > > Open source based consulting work centered around > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
