"Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

"Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Kalle Korhonen-2
In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard had
changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id instead
of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open
issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?

Kalle
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

balapal
Hi Kalle,

I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this change:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
testify tests started to fail due to this.

Regards,
Balazs

On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard had
> changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id instead
> of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open
> issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
>
> Kalle
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Kalle Korhonen-2
Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm inclined
to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had written
in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know
why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back.

Kalle

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Kalle,
>
> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this change:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
> testify tests started to fail due to this.
>
> Regards,
> Balazs
>
> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard
> had
> > changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id
> instead
> > of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open
> > issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
> >
> > Kalle
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Kalle Korhonen-2
Hey Jochen & others, I'm still not positively clear on what forced the
change that caused TAP5-2482
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482> but I like your plan
assuming we don't want to a do full revert. Would be great to get Howard's
comment on it but looks like that's not going to happen now. Do you have
any more details about it?

Kalle

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm inclined
> to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had written
> in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know
> why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back.
>
> Kalle
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kalle,
>>
>> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this change:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
>> testify tests started to fail due to this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Balazs
>>
>> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard
>> had
>> > changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id
>> instead
>> > of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open
>> > issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
>> >
>> > Kalle
>> >
>>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Jochen Kemnade-3
Hi,

Am 12.10.2015 um 22:40 schrieb Kalle Korhonen:
> Hey Jochen & others, I'm still not positively clear on what forced the
> change that caused TAP5-2482
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482> but I like your plan
> assuming we don't want to a do full revert. Would be great to get Howard's
> comment on it but looks like that's not going to happen now. Do you have
> any more details about it?

No, I'm waiting for comments as well, but I also think that it's time to
move on.
I think the first step is to decide whether we should ensure that the
name attributes are the property names. If we say that this should be
the case, we can discuss how we can achieve that, either by just rolling
back the commit or by finding an alternative solution. I think I already
proposed some approaches but didn't get much feedback yet.

Jochen


> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm inclined
>> to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had written
>> in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know
>> why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kalle,
>>>
>>> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this change:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
>>> testify tests started to fail due to this.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Balazs
>>>
>>> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31), Howard
>>> had
>>>> changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id
>>> instead
>>>> of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any open
>>>> issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Jochen Kemnade-3
I just reverted Howard's change locally and the test suit runs fine. If
nobody objects during the weekend, I'll revert the commit.

Jochen

Am 13.10.2015 um 08:34 schrieb Jochen Kemnade:

> Hi,
>
> Am 12.10.2015 um 22:40 schrieb Kalle Korhonen:
>> Hey Jochen & others, I'm still not positively clear on what forced the
>> change that caused TAP5-2482
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482> but I like your plan
>> assuming we don't want to a do full revert. Would be great to get
>> Howard's
>> comment on it but looks like that's not going to happen now. Do you have
>> any more details about it?
>
> No, I'm waiting for comments as well, but I also think that it's time to
> move on.
> I think the first step is to decide whether we should ensure that the
> name attributes are the property names. If we say that this should be
> the case, we can discuss how we can achieve that, either by just rolling
> back the commit or by finding an alternative solution. I think I already
> proposed some approaches but didn't get much feedback yet.
>
> Jochen
>
>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm
>>> inclined
>>> to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had
>>> written
>>> in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know
>>> why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back.
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kalle,
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this
>>>> change:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
>>>> testify tests started to fail due to this.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Balazs
>>>>
>>>> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31),
>>>>> Howard
>>>> had
>>>>> changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id
>>>> instead
>>>>> of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any
>>>>> open
>>>>> issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Base form control names of component's id, not allocated client-side id" - why?

Kalle Korhonen-2
I agree, I think that's the right course of action (at least until we know
better what might force using a different id).

Kalle

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:14 AM, Jochen Kemnade <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I just reverted Howard's change locally and the test suit runs fine. If
> nobody objects during the weekend, I'll revert the commit.
>
> Jochen
>
>
> Am 13.10.2015 um 08:34 schrieb Jochen Kemnade:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 12.10.2015 um 22:40 schrieb Kalle Korhonen:
>>
>>> Hey Jochen & others, I'm still not positively clear on what forced the
>>> change that caused TAP5-2482
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482> but I like your plan
>>> assuming we don't want to a do full revert. Would be great to get
>>> Howard's
>>> comment on it but looks like that's not going to happen now. Do you have
>>> any more details about it?
>>>
>>
>> No, I'm waiting for comments as well, but I also think that it's time to
>> move on.
>> I think the first step is to decide whether we should ensure that the
>> name attributes are the property names. If we say that this should be
>> the case, we can discuss how we can achieve that, either by just rolling
>> back the commit or by finding an alternative solution. I think I already
>> proposed some approaches but didn't get much feedback yet.
>>
>> Jochen
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks. You can probably guess how I too found out about it. I'm
>>>> inclined
>>>> to side with Jochen on this, that it's a step backwards. Howard had
>>>> written
>>>> in the comments that it may cause id conflicts and if we don't even know
>>>> why it was changed, we could just as well roll it back.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Balázs Palcsó <[hidden email]
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Kalle,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure what is the reason, but I opened an issue after this
>>>>> change:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2482 , because my tapestry
>>>>> testify tests started to fail due to this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Balazs
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 August 2015 at 22:19, Kalle Korhonen <[hidden email]
>>>>> >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In 22bd2c14b3c7d91ebd97cbc264882552c12044f7 (since 5.4-beta-31),
>>>>>> Howard
>>>>>>
>>>>> had
>>>>>
>>>>>> changed the form control name to be based on component's simple id
>>>>>>
>>>>> instead
>>>>>
>>>>>> of the component's client-side id. This change is not based on any
>>>>>> open
>>>>>> issue, so I'm just trying to find the reason for the change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>