My assumption is that the initial arrival will be akin to Tobago, part of MyFaces, yes, but a third set alongside Tomahawk and Tobago.
This of course raises major questions going forward of how to integrate all of these into one coherent set - and, of course, the question of whether to integrate at all (default answer - yes). These aren't new questions for MyFaces - it already exists within the context of Tomahawk + Tobago, but it does make it an even bigger and tougher issue. BTW, yes, we've got our own ViewHandler (currently registered implicitly via META-INF/faces-config.xml). The big nastiness with all these ViewHandlers is that ordering effects can be distinctly nasty to work with. The best thing to do, IMO, will be writing a single powerful ViewHandler with lots of separte, well-defined pluggability points. We do some of this sort of stuff already with a Service API that lets you define optional interfaces on a RenderKit that'll get called as needed by the ViewHandler - no private IP being revealed here, just google "ExtendedRenderKitService" for a taste of the idea :) -- Adam On 12/28/05, Glen Mazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martin Marinschek wrote: > > >So what other suggestions are there for the naming of ADF-Faces? > > > > > > > > I may be missing something here, but according to Ted the intention is > to incorporate Oracle's contribution into MyFaces, so any new name for > ADF is likely to be temporary only and not that important an issue. > Also, it doesn't appear Oracle's donation will ever move past incubation > status into its own project, because again it will be absorbed by > MyFaces, correct? > > Glen > > >
