myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Volker Weber <users.myfa...@weber-oldenburg.de>
Subject Re: Tobago and ADF --> Was .. Re: [proposal] Split Up JIRA Projects
Date Tue, 14 Feb 2006 14:03:49 GMT

Sean Schofield wrote:
> Volker,
> 
> Interesting proposal but I don't we have to address this just yet. 
> But since you brought it up, do you think its possible that ADF and
> Tobago could merge into a single project?  I don't know enough about
> either to say for sure.

I don't think so, should be easier to merge adf in tomahawk, but i don't
know mutch about adf.

> 
> I'm -1 on having saveState in 3 separate projects (tomahawk, tobago
> and adf.)  Why would it need to be in commons when it could just be in
> tomahawk?  Is there anything in tobago that *requires* save state?  Or
> is more accurate to say tobago provides a save state and so does
> tomahawk?  Again, I'm not too familiar with tobago ATM (but I will
> learn!)

tobago has no saveState, and did not require it, but i like the ability
to use it (and other tomahawk goodies) in applications. But none of the
rendering components could used in tobago. I think adding the full
tomahawk.jar to a application will mislead to use also non compatible
components from the lib.

Regards,
  Volker

> 
> Sean
> 
> On 2/14/06, Volker Weber <users.myfaces@weber-oldenburg.de> wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>+1 for jira split, imho it's needed for different release cycles.
>>
>>But before doing so we should think about another distributed jar file
>>we may want, I think we should have one :-).
>>
>>I had mentioned before when talking about naming for commons.jar, we
>>should have another jar for shared components/classes between tomahawk,
>>tobago( and adf?). Non rendering tags like aliasBean, saveState,
>>validators and other stuff which could used in both.
>>
>>I don't like to have impl depends on this, so commons.jar is imho not
>>the right place for those.
>>
>>Regards,
>>  Volker
>>
>>Erik Gustavson wrote:
>>
>>>It'll also make sense once ADF Faces gets into the mix.
>>>
>>>+1 for Jira split, esp. when tomahawk and core, etc... start having
>>>different release cycles.
>>>
>>>+1 for the snapshot naming convention
>>>
>>>+1 for Tomahawk components being listed as Jira components... that would
>>>make it very easy to assess the maturity of any given component for an
>>>end user.
>>>
>>>"commons" would make sense as a Jira component of MyFaces. What other
>>>Jira components would make sense under MyFaces then?
>>>
>>>commons
>>>(web) site
>>>documentation
>>>impl
>>>build (maven)
>>
>>--
>>Don't answer to From: address!
>>Mail to this account are droped if not recieved via mailinglist.
>>To contact me direct create the mail address by
>>concatenating my forename to my senders domain.
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Don't answer to From: address!
Mail to this account are droped if not recieved via mailinglist.
To contact me direct create the mail address by
concatenating my forename to my senders domain.

Mime
View raw message