>From Sean sent directly to me:

@Bill,

About the branch you created, was it off the trunk or the 1_1_0 tag?




On 9/23/05, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sure!
>
> +1 on that.
>
> thanks for catching this Sean!
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 9/23/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Apparently there is a problem with faces-config.xml in myfaces-all.jar
> > of the current release.  All of this confusion seems to be coming from
> > the fact that sandbox is in myfaces-all.jar in the nighlty but not the
> > release.  We have the -Dskip.sandbox option and a bunch of other hacks
> > in the build to make everything work the way it is now.
> >
> > I propose that we not include the sandbox stuff in the myfaces-all.jar
> > anymore.  I was always against this and I think the resulting
> > confusion and series of hacks outweighs the argument of those that are
> > lazy and don't want to include two jars in their ongoing projects.
> >
> > Sandbox is untested, undocumented, unvoted and unreleased code.  It
> > deserves its own jar with its own tld.  Its already excluded from the
> > release build (which I believe is correct) but the myfaces-all.jar in
> > the nightly should mirror whats in the release.
> >
> > So the proposal is that dist-all generates a separate sandbox.jar with
> > its own faces-config.xml and its own sanbox.tld.
> >
> > I propose we do this *before* any patch release.  Also this will not
> > affect SVN.  It will be a build change only.
> >
> > sean
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> Zülpicher Wall 12, 239
> 50674 Köln
>


--
Matthias Wessendorf
Zülpicher Wall 12, 239
50674 Köln

Reply via email to