If you have access, there should be a big edit button in the top-right corner of the page.
@Michael: Did you grant Thomas edit access? Ali On 4 December 2013 22:08, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just checking I am not doing something stupid here; If I did have editing > access how would I edit it? I am not seeing a "edit" button on my screen > or on the dropdown under Tools. > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 4 December 2013 22:56, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> If you already have wiki access, then you should be able to edit it. >> If not, poke Michael Macfadden. >> >> On 4 December 2013 21:55, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > ah...ok. >> > If someone could give me editing ability's over that getting started >> guide >> > then. Doesn't sound like I could make it worse at this point ;) >> > >> > ~~~ >> > Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> > >> > >> > On 4 December 2013 22:40, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >> > >> >> The client console does not exist anymore. >> >> It was removed the code base (at least) two years ago. >> >> >> >> Ali >> >> >> >> On 4 December 2013 21:38, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Ok, just checking the output of the build. >> >> > >> >> > I have a "dist" folder with: >> >> > >> >> > pst.jar >> >> > wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar >> >> > wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar >> >> > >> >> > The old guide ( >> >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Building+Wave+in+a+Box# >> >> ) >> >> > makes reference to >> >> > >> >> > waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar >> >> > waveinabox-server-0.3.jar >> >> > >> >> > in a "wave-protocol" directory. Neither the directory or those files >> >> exist. >> >> > I assume "waveinabox-server-0.3.jar" is now called >> >> > "wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar" >> >> > But is "waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar" now >> >> > "wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar" ? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ~~~ >> >> > Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> >> > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> >> > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 4 December 2013 21:50, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Might be worth at some point looking into alternatives for >> >> multi-language >> >> >> support? >> >> >> Should be possible without multiplying compile times. >> >> >> I'll have to look into it once I am up and running. >> >> >> >> >> >> ~~~ >> >> >> Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> >> >> http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> >> >> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4 December 2013 21:33, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Permutation is not only per browser, it is also per language and I >> >> think >> >> >>> WIAB supports 4 languages. >> >> >>> Anyway, it is very strange it took 4 hours, probably 2 GB is too >> >> little, >> >> >>> you ll need about 4 GB. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com >> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > 32??? There isnt 32 different browser engines is there :? >> >> >>> > My own GWT projects, (using 2.5.1) use 7 at most. (and even that >> >> should >> >> >>> go >> >> >>> > down in newer versions as Opera phase's out Presto.) >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > It wasn't GWT permutations taking the bulk of the time anyway, >> mind >> >> >>> you - >> >> >>> > it seemed to mostly be the testing and (strangely) expanding JAR >> >> files. >> >> >>> > That was just my perception though. Certainly before it got to >> >> >>> > "compile-gwt:" took at least 4 hours. >> >> >>> > Would the log help here? >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > My machine is a 4200 dual core Amd. Not much ram (2GB), was >> running >> >> >>> chrome >> >> >>> > at the same time, but not doing anything intensive. I wouldn't be >> >> >>> surprised >> >> >>> > if my machine is to blame here, but I cant think why it would be >> this >> >> >>> > different. >> >> >>> > --- >> >> >>> > Anyway, dinner now, then back to poking at things. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > ~~~ >> >> >>> > Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> >> >>> > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> >> >>> > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > On 4 December 2013 20:59, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > We have 32 GWT permutations the moment, we used to have only >> 4... >> >> Some >> >> >>> > last >> >> >>> > > changes caused this increase... We need to be more cautious >> about >> >> >>> > updating >> >> >>> > > GWT client code. >> >> >>> > > I tried >> >> >>> > > ant clean dist-server compile-gwt test >> >> >>> > > It took me about 16 minutes. If you tried the default target >> which >> >> >>> also >> >> >>> > > includes running tests then it could take about 6 minutes more. >> >> >>> > > So max 21 minutes on 2-core laptop. This is for the full prod >> >> build, >> >> >>> if >> >> >>> > you >> >> >>> > > run the server from compiled source with dev GWT setting(only 2 >> >> >>> > > permutations) then it takes only a few minutes, or even less. >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > Basically running wave is simple like: >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > git clone git://git.apache.org/wave.git wave >> >> >>> > > cd wave >> >> >>> > > cp server.config.example server.config >> >> >>> > > ant dist-server compile-gwt run-server >> >> >>> > > Open the browser at http://localhost:9898 >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> >> wrote: >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > > > "BUILD SUCCESSFUL >> >> >>> > > > > Total time: 312 minutes 41 seconds" >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > Err.. it takes ~5 minutes on my dev machine! Is this a single >> >> core >> >> >>> vm, >> >> >>> > > > doing lots of swapping, and with shared io? >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > > Suggestion; >> >> >>> > > > > Would it be possible to have a virtual machine with >> everything >> >> >>> set up >> >> >>> > > > > already? or is there technical/license reasons for that to >> be >> >> >>> > > unsuitable? >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > I suspect this would be difficult. (And you don't really want >> to >> >> be >> >> >>> in >> >> >>> > a >> >> >>> > > > VM). >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > > Query: >> >> >>> > > > > Can Wave be updated to JDK7? is there big issues holding it >> >> back >> >> >>> ? Or >> >> >>> > > is >> >> >>> > > > > there more open alternatives we can use instead - one that >> >> doesn't >> >> >>> > > > require >> >> >>> > > > > handing over personal details to a company? >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > (OpenJDK 1.6 works fine, so...) >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > This is quite difficult to do for the codebase. You would also >> >> need >> >> >>> to >> >> >>> > > > upgrade all the third-party components. >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > Please continue to provide feedback. >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > Thanks. >> >> >>> > > > Ali >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
