-
1. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
monkeyden Aug 14, 2007 8:01 PM (in response to mgrouch)If by "off topic" you mean "right in the sweet spot" then yeah, I agree. Great news!
-
2. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
mgrouch Aug 16, 2007 1:50 PM (in response to mgrouch)By the way the forum link for RedHat Developer studio is hard
to find now
So here it is:
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewforum&f=258 -
3. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
monkeyden Aug 16, 2007 4:05 PM (in response to mgrouch)isn't everything hard to find with phpBB?
-
4. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
damianharvey Aug 17, 2007 9:54 AM (in response to mgrouch)Anyone had any joy with this on the Mac? Tried to use the Linux version and the install works but the Eclipse executable isn't Mac friendly.
Cheers,
Damian. -
5. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
norman.richards Aug 17, 2007 12:29 PM (in response to mgrouch)It's really a shame that we've decided to release this without a mac build, but since many of the Seam and Hibernate team are on macs, I'm pretty sure mac support will be a high priority. I encourage complaining loudly. :)
-
6. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
maxandersen Aug 18, 2007 1:55 AM (in response to mgrouch)I encourage you guys to use JBoss Tools update site if you use mac.....no os specific dependencies.
-
7. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
modoc Aug 18, 2007 2:07 AM (in response to mgrouch)Yes, JBoss Tools works pretty well now.
The update site is:
http://download.jboss.org/jbosstools/updates/development
There are a few things that do not work on the Mac, for instance the Red Hat HTML editor preview, etc...
What I've done is pair the JBoss Tools (for things like seam-gen and the hibernate tools, and other Seam niceties) with MyEclipseIDE, which has nice JSF and XHTML editors, with preview functions that work on the Mac. (I'm running their 6.0M1 on Eclipse 3.3 now). MyEclipseIDE has better Mac support, but is lacking the Seam specifics that the JBoss Tools project brings.
Devon -
8. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
cfraser Sep 27, 2007 11:39 PM (in response to mgrouch)So just to clarify... what is not working on the Mac...
The preview, or the design time WYSIWYG editing.
Regards
C -
9. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
damianharvey Sep 28, 2007 5:35 AM (in response to mgrouch)Both. But IMO they're a waste of time anyway.
-
10. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
pmuir Sep 28, 2007 6:08 AM (in response to mgrouch)As Damian says. Unfortunately the content assist on JSF tags is also broken on a Mac as its tied to the visual editor in some way.
-
11. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
cfraser Sep 30, 2007 5:49 PM (in response to mgrouch)>> Both. But IMO they're a waste of time anyway.
Is that because you don't like visual editors in general, or are you referring to this visual editor specifically.
Regards
Colin -
12. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
damianharvey Oct 1, 2007 4:58 AM (in response to mgrouch)I don't like visual editors in general as I've never seen one that can actually lay out a page as you would expect to see it.
Pete, content assist for JSF tags is working for me (ie. start typing '#{' and it drops down a list of possible beans etc).
Cheers,
Damian, -
13. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
amitev Oct 2, 2007 12:43 AM (in response to mgrouch)With facelets you can use any visual editor and then put the jsfc attributes
-
14. Re: A bit off-topic: Red Hat Developer Studio 1.0 Beta 1 is
maxandersen Oct 3, 2007 9:26 AM (in response to mgrouch)damianharvey - please try out our visual editor (if you have access to a non-mac ;) and let me know what pages it cannot layout or preview properly.
Our editor/preview handles all templating and includes support in JSF.
Only thing I know that is currently an issue is if you use #{} expressions to decide the various includes - but I plan on adding support for this by allowing users to set some "default" values for these expressions so we can properly resolve the templates/includes.
Let me know how it goes ;)