Yeah -- having the JSF sample in its own webapp seems like the right thing to do.
:) EKO On 5/16/05, Richard Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for The Fifth Option. :) The src-jsf option would be the best > of the lot, except that it would get the JSF backing files out of the > directories with JSPs. I think that if we did that, we'd also want to > move the page flows into WEB-INF/src, throughout the webapp. Barring > that (at this point)... "netui-jsf"? > > Rich > > Eddie O'Neil wrote: > > > > > How about adding a "src-jsf" directory to the webapp and have a > > build target that will optionally compile the JSF related code? Then, > > there aren't any files to overlay and all of the netui related samples > > are in one place. > > > > Outside of that, I'd vote for #4 and just add a new JSF sample web > > application. Seems that this choice will be somewhat easier to > > explain, help get running via beehive-user@, and puts the JSF JAR > > dependencies into their own webapp. It's also less error prone when > > the .zip file is accidentally unzipped over the wrong directory. > > > > Given the number of webapps we've already got, adding another > > wouldn't be terrible. :) > > > > Eddie > > > > > > > > Richard Feit wrote: > > > >> Here's a dilemma: I've updated John Rohrlich's JSF sample and > >> integrated it into the "netui-samples" webapp, but some of the > >> classes depend on JSF API code. This prevents netui-samples from > >> building successfully unless JSF libraries are included in the > >> webapp. I think there are four things we can do: > >> > >> 1) Include myfaces-jsf-api.jar (the MyFaces version of the JSF > >> API, ~200K) > >> 2) Include myfaces.jar (all of MyFaces, ~1.2MB) > >> 3) Split out the JSF sample into a directory/zip that would get > >> overlayed on top of netui-samples > >> 4) Move the JSF sample into its own webapp > >> > >> I'm leaning towards #3. Anyone have any other opinions on this? > >> > >> Rich > >> > > > > >
