myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam Winer" <awi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Apache MyFaces commons
Date Thu, 03 May 2007 23:05:31 GMT
Ahhh!  :)  Makes much more sense.  Like you said,
I think there's already some confusion, this sets it
mostly straight.  Maybe some naming is in order?
What about:
  "MyFaces Basics": components/validators/filters, etc.
    that users can use anywhere (== CommonComponents)
  "MyFaces Commons": public APIs that we expose across
    the stack (== CommonAPIs)
  "MyFaces Shared": internal APIs that all the component
    libraries + the impl can collaborate and depend on?

But I'm not 100% convinced that there really is a difference
between CommonComponents and CommonAPIs, or
at least enough of a difference to merit splitting them.
Mike, what about the two makes you want to split
them?

Cheers,
Adam


On 5/3/07, Mike Kienenberger <mkienenb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Adam,
>
> Our past discussion on "commons" was to provide JSF
> components/validators/converters that could be used in any component
> library, even if that component library is not compatible with any
> other component library (ie, tobago).   I think perhaps this should be
> called CommonComponents.
>
> "Commons" as was used in this thread is not about building a component
> development API.   That is a different but often-brought-up topic that
> also needs a "vision".  We will want a CommonAPI to cover the area
> that Adam brought up.
>
> We should try to be clear about which we're talking about since we're
> already seeing some confusion in the thread.   For example,
> AddResources would probably be a part of CommonAPI rather than
> CommonComponents.
>
> Note that MyFaces also has a "shared" module where code is shared
> between MyFaces Core and MyFaces Tomahawk.
>
> On 5/3/07, Adam Winer <awiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Before we do this, we have to be careful on our vision:
> > - Are we looking to define internal utilities shared among
> >   Trinidad/Tomahawk/Tobago?
> > - Are we looking to define public APIs shared among these
> >   projects?
> > - Are we going to have a common package name for all
> >   such code?
> >
> > IMO, we should:
> >  - Have no components at all in here, at least to start,
> >    whether or not they render markup.
> >  - Use a common package name
> >  - Be very cautious and slow as we build this up, being *really*
> >    sure about the APIs we're adding.  This should be a foundational
> >    stone for a long time.
> >  - Start enforcing a public vs. private API split for real, and
> >    be rigorous about when we change public APIs without
> >    preserving backwards compatibility.
> >
> > Also, I don't think build dependencies belong in here, at least
> > not in terms of a packaged JAR.  Whether they live in
> > a "commons" in terms of SVN locations is fine.
> >
> > -- Adam
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/3/07, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Greetings from the ApacheCon in Amsterdam.
> > >
> > > It was discussed a lot on the list and Bernd and I are now taking the
> > > time to layout a "apache-myfaces-commons-[SUBSET]-VERSION.jar" file.
> > >
> > > Commons:
> > > -What should go into a commons JAR?
> > > Non renderKit related things like
> > >   -Converters and Validators
> > >   -NonFacesRequestServlet from Tobago
> > >   -FacesContextFactory from Tobago to ensure a kind of common layer
> > > for doing uploads
> > >   -the selectItems component from Tomahawk
> > >   -what are we missing ???
> > >
> > > Build dependencies:
> > >   - Trinidad's plugins/utils to generate stuff like the TagClass file.
> > >
> > > The vision:
> > >  Why this is needed ?
> > > It is kind of hard to actually use only some "common" pieces of
> > > Tomahawk. At least to add a custom validator, the complete jar is
> > > needed. The vision is also to add some "common" pieces from
> > > Trinidad/tobago to it.
> > >
> > > For Tomahawk this will not mean, you have to introduce a new namespace
> > > for adding the converter/validator, the "commons-jar" can be a rt
> > > dependency so that the TLD file is only referencing to the classes
> > > w/in the commons.jar.
> > >
> > > What are you missing ?
> > > We will compile a list into the MyFaces wiki, based on your feedback/comments
> > >
> > > -Bernd/Matthias
> > >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message