Re: [Springframework-developer] New Spring module

[<tri...@tr...>]

Juergen,

That does sound odd - I am looking at the code I have and everything looks fine.
 Did a compare with BeanWrapperImpl (The one you updated) and it appears that my
version and yours have not a single line in common - must be something with
whitespace or linefeed conversions.  Is anybody else seeing this?  What is
everybody using for CVS access?

I'm using cvs command line on Linux as well as Eclipse on both WinXP and Linux.
 I can't see the extra lines.

Thomas

> Hmmm, *all* source files have unnecessary empty lines after each original
> line. This looks awful and doubles the size. The only exception are the tag
> classes that Jean-Pierre checked in... Is this some fancy new Eclipse feature
> on Rod's installation, or even on purpose? ;-)
>  
> Unfortunately, not even a code reformatting helps (at least not with IDEA).
> So I guess we will probably have to re-checkin the *entire* source tree
> (except the tag classes, to be accurate ;-). Rod, Thomas, Jean-Pierre - can
> you try to deal with this, as I'm away till Saturday morning?
>  
> BTW, ResourceBundleViewResolverTestSuite seems broken because it can't read
> the testviews.properties property: Static attribute definitions are not
> recognized fully because there are empty lines inbetween them... We really
> need to re-checkin, as the properties are concerned too.
>  
> Juergen
>  
> 
> 	-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- 
> 	Von: Rod Johnson [mailto:rod...@in...] 
> 	Gesendet: Do 14.08.2003 09:57 
> 	An: spr...@li... 
> 	Cc: jürgen höller [werk3AT] 
> 	Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] New Spring module
> 	
> 	
> 
> 	All,
> 	
> 	Thomas has now completed the job and put the code in the existing "Spring"
> 	module. Please work on this by preference.
> 	
> 	The snapshot was taken at Aug 13 at 0800 GMT: any changes since to the main
> 	module will need to be manually replicated.
> 	
> 	Notes:
> 	
> 	- I haven't included the samples. I thought it would be better for JP and
> 	Ken to add these once they're modified. Changing the imports etc is easy
> 	with something like this:
> 	
> 	  <replace dir="whatever"  token="com.interface21"
> 	value="org.springframework">
> 	    <exclude name="*.jar"/>
> 	  </replace>
> 	
> 	- I haven't migrated /livetest. I really prefer the mock object approach
> for
> 	database testing. I'd love to test Isabelle's code without needing a
> 	database. Any volunteers??
> 	
> 	- I have put in a new /load tree, with the load testing code and some
> 	performance tests for Spring.
> 	
> 	- The tests pass, and with debug logging we have 75% coverage!
> 	
> 	Btw we should be able to use mock tests to test for different db resource
> 	closure failure scenarios.
> 	
> 	Regards,
> 	Rod
> 	
> 	----- Original Message -----
> 	From: <rod...@in...>
> 	To: "jürgen höller [werk3AT] " <jue...@we...>
> 	Cc: <spr...@li...>
> 	Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 5:14 PM
> 	Subject: RE: [Springframework-developer] API simplification
> 	
> 	
> 	> I've done the package rename and will commit it to a
> 	> new "spring" module tonight.
> 	>
> 	> I'll post more details when I'm done.
> 	>
> 	> I've been considering some potential simplifications. I hate
> 	> dead code--it adds bloat and makes frameworks harder to use.
> 	> (I've just been working with TopLink...) As we progress to
> 	> 1.0 it's a good opportunity to cut back to the
> 	> essentials...it will be hard to remove anything (however
> 	> useless) afterwards.
> 	>
> 	> As a start, I'm considering removing the JavaBean event
> 	> support from BeanWrapper. I've not used it in any
> 	> applications. Has anyone else used it?
> 	>
> 	> Now Spring has AOP support, it's possible to add listeners to
> 	> property change events using interceptors, rather than this
> 	> rather kludgy part of the JavaBeans API.
> 	>
> 	> Removing event support would get rid of about 150 lines of
> 	> code in the beans package, and simplify the API for users.
> 	>
> 	> Any thoughts on this?
> 	>
> 	> Another candidate on my potential hitlist is the "pass-
> 	> through" properties support for FactoryBeans. I've not seen a
> 	> need to use this in practice (although I implemented it).
> 	>
> 	> Regards,
> 	> Rod
> 	>
> 	>
> 	> -------------------------------------------------------
> 	> This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
> 	> Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
> 	> Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
> 	>
> 	http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01
> 	> _______________________________________________
> 	> Springframework-developer mailing list
> 	> Spr...@li...
> 	> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
> 	>
> 	
> 	
> 	
> 
>
N¬HS^µéšŠ[)¢{(­ç[ÈZÞzšÞn襴4DìŠ×¬Šw%¹Ø§€6­i©¢»lÊ&™êÜxú+µ©ljwE¢»¦±ªÞjö¢•¦åzz0Œ'–†¶‡ZÉ©Ýz{^®Ú0Šv§\—¢µb²æ¥J۝ŠƒDNm§ÿÚ²™ÞµÉbrK«•Ê&þ
>
?¦Æ´Ó]4ÓMÚ½ï݊·œµ«Z²™Þ·NößMô×ý5Jšâžëjg°¢¹z÷¥¢—«™¨¥Šx%ŠËR¦¸§úڙì(®G^½éh¥êåŠËl²‹«qç讧zØm¶›?þX¬¶Ë(º·~Šàzw­þX¬¶ÏåŠËbú?²šâžëjg°¢¹z÷¥¢—«