myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Marinschek" <martin.marinsc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JSF 1.2 [was: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces Committers/Contributors meeting]
Date Wed, 24 May 2006 17:26:31 GMT
@Sean: It's easy - I won't put in the work to do it if I can't work
with the version I have at hand. And I can't work with it when it
relies on TC6.0 (and I won't switch over to Glassfish right now). I
guess that I'll not be the only one.

 It's as easy as that. I promise to be the one to do the merging later on.

One more thing: there will be one branch only (JSF 1.2 TC 6) - the
trunk will JSF 1.2 TC 5.5.

The other branch will be our bugfixes-only JSF1.1 branch - no major
work being done there. I'd also say that if we want to get a bugfix in
this branch, we should get it in in the JSF 1.2 TC 5.5 as well, right
when the bugfix is applied. With this we save ourselves the hassle of
merging too much here.

@Dennis, you don't see the necessities to start with the major
features of the 1.2 implementation right now, even when TC 6.0 is not
yet available?

regards,

Martin

On 5/24/06, Dennis Byrne <dennis@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> Please no multiple branches.  Thanks.
>
> Dennis Byrne
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Sean Schofield [mailto:sean.schofield@gmail.com]
> >Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:56 PM
> >To: 'MyFaces Development', mmarinschek@apache.org
> >Subject: Re: JSF 1.2 [was: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces Committers/Contributors meeting]
> >
> >OK so Stan is past the TC 5.5 point.  Why do we need two branches?
> >Can't we just say that 1.2 depends on TC 6.0 or Glassfish?  I still
> >think we need to do everything we can to avoid multiple branches.
> >
> >Sean
> >
> >On 5/24/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> No. The current build should be compatible again - if I don't have old
> >> information here...
> >>
> >> regards,
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >> On 5/24/06, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > So does this mean that our Tomahawk releases are no longer compatible
> >> > with the RI?  That's our current problem right?
> >> >
> >> > Sean
> >> >
> >> > On 5/24/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > There is no 1.1 compliant way of fixing dummyform - there just isn't.
> >> > >
> >> > > I would have gone with a single branch for 1.2 and checking in TC5.5
> >> > > compatible stuff only, but Stan has already worked on 1.2, and he
has
> >> > > implemented also TC6 depending things, so no chance to go with this,
> >> > > except we want to loose what Stan did, and I wouldn't.
> >> > >
> >> > > I want to do development on the 1.1 branch for bugfixes only anymore.
> >> > > 1.2 is our future, and we should go there!
> >> > >
> >> > > regards,
> >> > >
> >> > > Martin
> >> > >
> >> > > On 5/23/06, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > Are we talking about the fix for DummyForm?  Are we not going
to
> >> > > > attempt to have a 1.1 compatible fix?  What about a single branch
for
> >> > > > 1.2 and only check in the Tomcat 5.5 compatible stuff?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I agree with Craig that you don't want to be actively developing
on
> >> > > > the trunk plus two branches.  Trust me, its difficult enough
managing
> >> > > > this when we have a short-lived branch for a release.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -1 for a long-term double branch strategy.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Sean
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 5/23/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > It's just that we need the 1.2 features for several things
we want to
> >> > > > > fix right now - and TC6 is still not released, so we can't
work with
> >> > > > > the full feature set of 1.2.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > regards,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Martin
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On 5/22/06, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > Why is there a need to have a separate branch for TC6
vs. TC55.  Sorry
> >> > > > > > if I missed the discussion on the need for this ...
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Sean
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On 5/22/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > > Hi Craig,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > critical fixes to 1.1. -> 1.1 branch
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > major development --> trunk
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > special things for 1.2 under TC6 only --> 1.2
branch
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > With this, it should be albe to merge down the
1.2 branch to the trunk, right?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > regards,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Martin
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On 5/22/06, Craig McClanahan <craigmcc@apache.org>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On 5/21/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > Ok,
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > one more addition to the discussion
- I'll want to branches. One for
> >> > > > > > > > > JSF1.2 things which cannot be used together
with Tomcat 5.5 and, one
> >> > > > > > > > > for JSF1.2 things which can be used
with Tomcat 5.5. I'd love trunk to
> >> > > > > > > > > be the JSF1.2/Tomcat 5.5 branch, and
have bug fixes for 1.1 on a real
> >> > > > > > > > > branch.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > summary:
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > 1.1 --> branch
> >> > > > > > > > > 1.2 Tomcat 6 --> branch
> >> > > > > > > > > 1.2 Tomcat 5.5. --> trunk
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > is that ok?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Wouldn't this mean that every change that
worked under 5.5 would need to be
> >> > > > > > > > committed to both branches?  That seems like
a good way to slow down the
> >> > > > > > > > effort to achieve 1.2 compliance.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > regards,
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Martin
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Craig
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > On 5/19/06, Stan Silvert < stan.silvert@jboss.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > That would be fine.  After I am
done we may need some help from Sean.
> >> > > > > > > > > > He was talking about putting Tomcat
6 jars in an Apache Maven
> >> > > > > > > > > > repository.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > I've been building with NetBeans
and not Maven.  So someone who is more
> >> > > > > > > > > > Maven savvy will need to update
things so it builds correctly.  I don't
> >> > > > > > > > > > think it will be more complicated
than adding and removing some
> >> > > > > > > > > > dependencies.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Stan Silvert
> >> > > > > > > > > > JBoss, Inc.
> >> > > > > > > > > > ssilvert@jboss.com
> >> > > > > > > > > > callto://stansilvert
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > > > > > > > > From: Manfred Geiler [mailto:
manfred.geiler@gmail.com]
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006
8:48 PM
> >> > > > > > > > > > > To: MyFaces Development
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: JSF 1.2 [was:
Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Committers/Contributors meeting]
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Sean,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Can you please make a copy
of the current trunk to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > /myfaces/core/branches/jsf_1_2
?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > After that, Stan can simply
(?) merge his stuff inside that.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Is that ok, Stan?
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Manfred
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > On 5/18/06, Sean Schofield
<sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > You want a 1.2 branch
for core only using the latest trunk right?  I
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > can create it for you
if you want ...
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Sean
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/18/06, Martin Marinschek
< martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Manfred, can you
go ahead with that 1.2 branch?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/18/06, Thomas
Spiegl <thomas.spiegl@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm having
a look at tomahawk 416
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for creating
a 1.2 branch
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/18/06,
Stan Silvert <stan.silvert@jboss.com > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have
implemented most of the new core API's and fixed most
> >> > > > > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deprecated
ones to be backwards compatible with 1.1 (if you
> >> > > > > > > > > > look
> >> > > > > > > > > > > at the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.2 javadocs
you'll see what I mean).  If you look at the
> >> > > > > > > > > > section
> >> > > > > > > > > > > in the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > spec preface
entitled "What's Changed Since the Last Release"
> >> > > > > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > > can
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > get a
feel for what I did.  I've pretty much done everything
> >> > > > > > > > > > in
> >> > > > > > > > > > > that
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > list.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of
it is covered under this issue, which just says to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > implement
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > several
sections of the spec:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1274
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe
all of 1274 is complete except
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ApplicationImpl.getResourceBundle
().  I
> >> > > > > > > > needed code that reads
> >> > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > new
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > faces-context.xml
for that one.  However, all the ELResolver
> >> > > > > > > > > > stuff
> >> > > > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > done including
the ResourceBundleELResolver.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've also
done some of the issues listed under General
> >> > > > > > > > > > Changes.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > For
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > each item
in that list, I created a Jira task.  You can look
> >> > > > > > > > > > at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Jira and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see which
ones I did.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was
just getting started on the javax.faces.webapp package
> >> > > > > > > > > > when
> >> > > > > > > > > > > I was
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > taken
off of the project.  I probably won't commit any changes
> >> > > > > > > > > > > from
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that.
 I didn't touch the components or renderer at all.  With
> >> > > > > > > > > > all
> >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > backward-compatible
code I wrote, it appears that all the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > components
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > still
work even though they are written the " 1.1 way".
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, hopefully,
what you guys will have to start with is a JSF
> >> > > > > > > > > > 1.2
> >> > > > > > > > > > > impl
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that is
about half-way done and still works.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stan Silvert
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JBoss,
Inc.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ssilvert@jboss.com
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > callto://stansilvert
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original
Message-----
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From:
Thomas Spiegl [mailto:thomas.spiegl@gmail.com ]
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent:
Wednesday, May 17, 2006 4:58 PM
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To:
MyFaces Development; werpu@gmx.at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject:
Re: JSF 1.2 [was: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Committers/Contributors
meeting]
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1
for solving tomahawk 416, being incompatible to RI is a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > serious
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > issue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stan
which 1.2 issues did you fix. Did you change any link
> >> > > > > > > > > > > renderers?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If
not, i am
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1
for open a 1.2 branch
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On
5/17/06, Werner Punz < werpu@gmx.at> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Sean Schofield schrieb:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> I'm -1 on the 1.2 branch.  There are major issues to be
> >> > > > > > > > > > > fixed in
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> core right now.  (See TOMAHAWK-416 and related dev
> >> > > > > > > > > > > discussions.)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> know that Stan is anxious but given the lack of interest
> >> > > > > > > > > > in
> >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > core
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> trunk, its hard to imagine we have enough support to
> >> > > > > > > > > > sustain
> >> > > > > > > > > > > this
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> branch.  Do we have firm committments from anyone else
> >> > > > > > > > > > > besides
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stan?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
+1 for a fork... the reason we need to get going asap and
> >> > > > > > > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > fork
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > helps.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
If we wait for another bunch of issues to be fixed, this
> >> > > > > > > > > > will
> >> > > > > > > > > > > never
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > end.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Sorry to say that so harsh, but the time on 1.2 is really
> >> > > > > > > > > > > pressing,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
given that there wont be an option in jee to override the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > default
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
implementation via other libs in WEB-INF/lib like it was
> >> > > > > > > > > > > possible in
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JEE4
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your
JSF powerhouse -
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF
Consulting, Development and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses
in English and German
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional
Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse
-
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting,
Development and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in
English and German
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional
Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse
-
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting,
Development and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English
and German
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support
for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > --
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> > > > > Courses in English and German
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > >
> >> > > http://www.irian.at
> >> > >
> >> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> > > Courses in English and German
> >> > >
> >> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> http://www.irian.at
> >>
> >> Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> Courses in English and German
> >>
> >> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >>
> >
>
>
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Mime
View raw message