I just want to remind that there are still a significant number of sites which cannot move to Java 5 because of restrictions implied by the Application Server used. WebSphere would be here candidate number 1 to be named but I know also a large number of WebLogic sites which cannot migrate to versions supporting Java 5.
As long the use of Java 5 features would be compensated by using Retroweaver to produce jars working in 1.4.x runtimes I would be happy. If support for the 1.4.x environments would be stopped I foresee some conflicts. Using Retroweaver is no ideal solution, it would require to provide two parallel jar-structures. But it's better than leaving a lot of sites without a top-level JSF-implementation. Regards, Heinz On 11/2/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree, > > lets wait until we branch then start putting the 5.0 syntax. > > TTFN, > > -bd- > > On Nov 2, 2005, at 10:51 AM, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > > IMHO: No, we shouldn't. > > > > as soon as we branch of for 1.2, we will. > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On 11/2/05, Grant Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Speaking of JDK1.5, now that we've released a TCK-compliant JSF 1.1 > >> implementation, and we're looking to the future, should we start > >> allowing 1.5 syntax in the HEAD ? > >> > >> I'm also now using .jspx (JSP XML format) exclusively in my own > >> projects, as it's easier to edit in XML editors and just *looks* > >> cleaner. Converting our example .jsp s should not be a huge task. > >> > >> > >> Martin Marinschek wrote: > >> > >>> @srcs not compiling: > >>> > >>> That's Travis working on JDK1.5 who hasn't ensured backwards > >>> compatibility. > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Trainings in English and German > >
