Sure! we might do the same sometime ;)
regards, Martin On 11/9/06, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yay.. Thanks Martin. Martin Marinschek wrote: > There is nothing offending in copying any of the classes over from > MyFaces-Impl to Trinidad! > > regards, > > Martin > > On 11/8/06, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hey Guys, >> >> All arguments about the need for a "common" code package aside (yes, I >> will continue to champion this), Trinidad has the need to create >> container abstractions for some of our initialization services. We're >> basically going to use the external context to pass into these services >> because it's a familiar interface. The reason this needs to be done >> outside of the Faces arena is that these services MAY be kicked off from >> a filter if one is present because there were some usecases we just >> couldn't resolve in order to eliminate the need for the filter in order >> to work in the portal. Many of the usecases, however, can be written in >> a container-agnostic fashion and run from the portal. >> >> So here is my question. Is it bad for to copy come of the MyFaces code >> (namely the ExternalContext code) and move it into our packages, >> changing it as we need to. We cannot be dependent on the MyFaces Impl >> package (which is where this code currently exists) in order to maintain >> compatibility with the RI. Seems silly to rewrite these containers >> though. >> >> I figured I'd ask since both MyFaces and Trinidad are under the Apache >> Liscence. And yes, when/if we get a common package, we may be able to >> share this code but I'm on somewhat of a time limit. >> >> Scott >> >> >> > >
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
