myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Schofield <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JSF 1.2 now !?!
Date Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:55:36 GMT
I'm also not very "itchy" for JSF 1.2.  I too will be looking at
facelets on my next JSF project or using the RI.  I'd rather spend my
energies on a really solid component foundation.

My suggestion is that we hold off on the JSF 1.2 stuff for a month or
so at least until we get a chance to release, fix the website, square
away JIRA and assimilate Tobago.  Those tasks will require everybody's
attention and will ultimately impact the 1.2 effort (at least from an
infrastructure standpoint.)

I also think we need a *very* well though out plan for how to proceed
with 1.2 so we don't confuse the hell out of everybody (including
ourselves.)  I don't think its just as simple as making a branch. 
Maybe we could start with a detailed roadmap of how the 1.2 effort
would work and who is willing to work on it.  Something more then just
creating a branch and seeing what happens ...

Sean

On 2/15/06, Mike Kienenberger <mkienenb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Because this is an apache project, there's nothing stopping a set of
> the developers from working on JSF 1.2 if that's their "itch to
> scratch" (other than a PMC mandate).  At least, that's my impression
> from watching the struts dev mailing list over the years.
>
> Personally, I'm -0 on working on a JSF 1.2 branch.   I'm +1 on adding
> 1.2 features to the existing 1.1 branch so long as they're compatible,
> but I don't have the option/interest of doing Java 1.5 work at this
> time, and Java 1.5 is a requirement for JSF 1.2.
>
> <shameless plug>
> Besides, Facelets gives me almost all of the missing JSF 1.2 features
> at no extra cost while continuing to use MyFaces 1.1.
> </shameless plug>
>
> On 2/15/06, Simon Kitching <skitching@apache.org> wrote:
> > -0 on making trunk a JSF1.2 project.
> >
> > There is a whole lot of work still to be done to stabilise the 1.1.x
> > series; the JIRA issues list alone shows that. I would prefer to see the
> > main emphasis be on getting a "finished" release of the 1.1 spec rather
> > than on having an incomplete 1.1 and an incomplete 1.2 concurrently.
> > That doesn't mean that work on 1.2 features can't happen; just I think
> > that trunk (which is the easiest and most obvious place to work) should
> > stay with 1.1.x until all the major JIRA issues are fixed. Patches for
> > the 1.1.x series can be applied to "trunk", then merged to the 1.2
> > branch at leisure; this seems more sensible than having things the other
> > way around.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Simon
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 05:38 -0700, Bill Dudney wrote:
> > > +1 on branching 1.1.x and moving trunk to JSF 1.2
> > >
> > > Bill Dudney
> > > MyFaces - myfaces.apache.org
> > > Wadi - incubator.apache.org/wadi
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 15, 2006, at 12:08 AM, John Fallows wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 2/14/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >         Wo-ow!
> > > >
> > > >         cool, that went fast!
> > > >
> > > >         Now, I'm definitely for a JSF 1.2 branch, if we can go with
> > > >         that.
> > > >
> > > > We'd probably want to branch the more stable 1.1.x codeline and let
> > > > trunk evolve to leverage the new 1.2 APIs.
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > John Fallows.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >         regards
> > > >
> > > >         Martin
> > > >
> > > >         On 2/14/06, jacob@hookom.net <jacob@hookom.net> wrote:
> > > >         > The commons-el code is poor IMHO.  The one I donated to
> > > >         Jasper was originally founded within the RI 1.1 donation and
> > > >         benchmarked quite a bit faster at the time.
> > > >         >
> > > >         > The one re-written for the EL-API and donated to both Sun
> > > >         and Apache is based on Java CC, and finely tuned for JSF's
> > > >         serialization and stateful lifecycles around VariableMappers
> > > >         and FunctionMappers.
> > > >         >
> > > >         > I may be biased, but I think it would be a waste of time
> > > >         to try to modify the commmons-el solution for the EL-API.
> > > >         >
> > > >         > BTW, on the topic of JSF 1.2 and findComponent, we've
> > > >         added invokeOnComponent to the spec, implemented much like
> > > >         was discussed here on the dev list and has been implemented
> > > >         and tested within the RI.  I, personally, would like to see
> > > >         MyFaces adopt this method early instead of providing a
> > > >         partial solution with perspectives to users.
> > > >         >
> > > >         > -- Jacob
> > > >         >
> > > >         > >
> > > >         > >> Wow!.  I must have missed that email!  Was it donated
> > > >         to MyFaces?  I
> > > >         > >
> > > >         > >I think it was sent, when you are on vacation ;-)
> > > >         > >
> > > >         > >-Matthias
> > > >         >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >         --
> > > >
> > > >         http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > >         Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > >         JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > >         Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > >         Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10044
> > > > Author: Pro JSF and Ajax: Building Rich Internet Components, Apress
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message