Sean, did you also drop the WML stuff?
-Matthias On 7/6/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This proposal might be a bit controversial... > > I think we should make everything in tomahawk 100% RI compliant and > remove anything that is not. We've made (eroneous) claims in the past > that the stuff in the old components.jar will work with the RI but > there are several exceptions. I think we can get broader > usage/acceptance of the tomahawk stuff if we can legitimately claim > that it works with any implementation. > > Rather than dumping everything that does not currently work with the > RI, I recommend we move it to the sandbox and perhaps resurrect it > when we have the time/interest. There are a few components that have > minor RI quirks that I think we can leave in tomahawk but address them > ASAP. Other components/extensions have outright dependencies on the > myfaces implementation. > > One major component that should be moved out of tomahawk (IMO) is > tiles. Let me start by saying that I like the Tiles stuff and it is > one thing that attracted me to MyFaces. But it requires the MyFaces > implementation (uses some view controller stuff.) We could refactor > it but I am not volunteering for that. If someone else is prepared to > refactor then I say leave it in tomahawk an refactor. If not, lets > move it to sandbox. > > David Geary (Tiles guru) just checked in some JSF Tiles support into > the Shale project. If we dropped Tiles from tomahawk (and sandbox) > that might not be the end of the world. > > There are other components as well that are not RI compliant. We > should make a list and figure out what we want to do with them. At a > *minimum* we should list the stuff in tomahawk that does *not* work > with the RI and publicize that list. > > sean > -- Matthias Wessendorf
