myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [core] Backwards compatibility (e.g. MYFACES-2543)
Date Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:35:06 GMT
nope, but the web.xml setting for Trinidad's alternate view handler;

it is complaining about the facelets embedded faces-config

-Matthias

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Jakob Korherr <jakob.korherr@gmail.com> wrote:
> have you installed the com.sun.facelets.FaceletViewHandler in faces-config?
> and which error did you get?
>
>
> 2010/2/11 Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>
>>
>> @ "javax.faces.DISABLE_FACELET_JSF_VIEWHANDLER"
>>
>> I tried (Glassfish v3) to deploy a JSF 1.2 application (with Facelets
>> 1.1.14) and that "javax.faces.DISABLE_FACELET_JSF_VIEWHANDLER"
>> parameter ==> true;
>>
>> I get an error there as well :-)
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Jakob Korherr <jakob.korherr@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > No I have not filed any bugs. Feel free to file them ;)
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Jakob
>> >
>> > 2010/2/10 Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Ganesh <ganesh@j4fry.org> wrote:
>> >> > IMHO the spec is very clear about this and the stuff in the appendix
>> >> > is
>> >> > a
>> >> > spec bug. From the spec (10.1.2):
>> >> >
>> >> > A decision was made early in this process to strive for backwards
>> >> > compatibility between the latest popular version of Facelets and
>> >> > Facelets in
>> >> > JSF 2.0. The sole determinant to backwards compatibility lies in the
>> >> > answer
>> >> > to the question, “is there any Java code in the application, or in
>> >> > libraries
>> >> > used by the application, that extends from or depends on any class
in
>> >> > package com.sun.facelets and/or its sub-packages?”
>> >> > ■ If the answer to this question is “yes”, Facelets in JSF 2.0
is not
>> >> > backwards compatibile with Facelets and such an application must
>> >> > continue to
>> >> > bundle the Facelets jar file along with the application, continue to
>> >> > set
>> >> > the
>> >> > Facelets configuration parameters, and also set the
>> >> > javax.faces.DISABLE_FACELET_JSF_VIEWHANDLER
>> >> > <context-param> to true. Please see Section 11.1.3 “Application
>> >> > Configuration Parameters” for details on this
>> >> > option. Any code that extends or depends on any class in package
>> >> > com.sun.facelets and/or its sub-packages
>> >> > must be modified to depend on the appropriate classes in package
>> >> > javax.faces.webapp.vdl and/or its subpackages.
>> >>
>> >> yes (see previous email(s))
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > ■ If the answer to this question is “no”, Facelets in JSF 2.0
is
>> >> > backwards
>> >> > compatible with pre-JSF 2.0 Facelets and such an application must not
>> >> > continue to bundle the Facelets jar file along with the application,
>> >> > and
>> >> > must not continue to set the Facelets configuration parameters.
>> >> > Thankfully, most applications that use Facelets fall into the latter
>> >> > category, or, if they fall in the former, their dependence will
>> >> > easily
>> >> > be
>> >> > migrated to the new public classes.
>> >>
>> >> ok. please; file a bug on that appendix thing.
>> >>
>> >> thjx
>> >> -m
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> > Ganesh
>> >> >
>> >> > Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Ganesh <ganesh@j4fry.org>
wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Many Facelets taglibs don't use Facelets tag handlers,
>> >> >>> but simply wrap some xhtml templates. Nothing will stop these
>> >> >>> libraries
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> work with MyFaces if we allow old version taglibs.
>> >> >>> If we insist on refusing them people will simply switch to
Mojarra
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> get
>> >> >>> their application to run.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know; that's what I meant with my comment before
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> The argument of a xsd:restriction in the spec will
>> >> >>> help little. Just
>> >> >>> taking old Facelets is *not* a solution, because the
>> >> >>> rest of the application may want to use the new features.
>> >> >>> Please try filing this as a bug to Mojarra as Matthias
>> >> >>> proposed - if they fix it, MyFaces may insist on version=2.0,
but
>> >> >>> if
>> >> >>> they
>> >> >>> don't I think we shouldn't
>> >> >>> either.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I agree
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I've carried the question whether a JSF 2.0 compatible
>> >> >>> implementation
>> >> >>> is
>> >> >>> required to refuse old version facelets taglibs into the EG
- let's
>> >> >>> see,
>> >> >>> what they have to say
>> >> >>
>> >> >> technically, I think now we are correct.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @Jakob: Did you create such a bug against the RI ?
>> >> >> (that they allow "old" Facelets) maybe another on
>> >> >> not being (too) clear in the spec about it...
>> >> >> -Matthias
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> on this ...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Best regards,
>> >> >>> Ganesh
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I see both ways; I think I don't like the fact that the
RI has
>> >> >>>> this
>> >> >>>> "bug"
>> >> >>>> :)
>> >> >>>> So, end of the story is, almost everybody will blame this
to us
>> >> >>>> ;-)
>> >> >>>> "Oh, crappy MyFaces doesn't work" etc :) All the FUD! :)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>
>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Mime
View raw message