What with
<faceletHandlerClass>org.apache.myfaces.adfinternal.facelets.AdfComponentHandler</faceletHandlerClass>
?
I am fine with TrinidadComponentHandler, b/c this is *specific* to T.
-Matt
On 7/21/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/20/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For class names, I'm thinking that:
> AdfFacesContext -> RequestContext, or maybe LifecycleContext
> AdfRenderingContext -> RenderingContext
> (the latter is currently a private-ish internal class, but I think
> we should make it public at some point.)
I like that RequestContext and RenderingContext thing
> I also wish we could keep the "internal" part of the package; I'd
> rather have:
>
> org.apache.myfacesinternal.trinidad
> org.apache.myfaces.trinidadinternal
ok.
Any other opinion ?
> ... than:
>
> org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.internal
>
> Doing it "without the dot" forces all the internal code
> into an entirely different directory structure, which is
> handy for things like doc + inclusion rules - you don't
> have to specify exclusion rules, just inclusion.
>
> -- Adam
>
>
> On 7/20/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ADF-FACES-API
> > > package
> > > from
> > > org.apache.myfaces.adf.**
> > >
> > > to
> > > org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.**
> > >
> > > ADF-FACES-IMPL
> > > package
> > > from
> > > org.apache.myfaces.adfinternal.**
> > >
> > > to
> > > org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.internal.**
> > > (note trinidad DOT internal)
> >
> > Since nobody seams to have a problem with the package suggestion, I think we
> > should move on on this task, ok ?
> >
> > o.a.m.trinidad is also fine. Tobago does the same.
> > they use also the myfaces specific namespace.
> >
> > Only tomahawk doesn't :)
> >
> > org.apache.myfaces.custom
> >
> > but that is from ooooooooold days. Hard to change :)
> >
> >
> >
> > > More interesting are class names like AdfFacesContext.
> > > Naming them TrinidadContext might not a good solution.
> > > Note: This class is *not* extending FacesContext.
> > >
> > > ExternalContext might be a good name...
> > > but... as we all know, this is already taken :)
> > >
> > > Any ideas?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
