Hi, +1 for jira split, imho it's needed for different release cycles.
But before doing so we should think about another distributed jar file we may want, I think we should have one :-). I had mentioned before when talking about naming for commons.jar, we should have another jar for shared components/classes between tomahawk, tobago( and adf?). Non rendering tags like aliasBean, saveState, validators and other stuff which could used in both. I don't like to have impl depends on this, so commons.jar is imho not the right place for those. Regards, Volker Erik Gustavson wrote: > It'll also make sense once ADF Faces gets into the mix. > > +1 for Jira split, esp. when tomahawk and core, etc... start having > different release cycles. > > +1 for the snapshot naming convention > > +1 for Tomahawk components being listed as Jira components... that would > make it very easy to assess the maturity of any given component for an > end user. > > "commons" would make sense as a Jira component of MyFaces. What other > Jira components would make sense under MyFaces then? > > commons > (web) site > documentation > impl > build (maven) -- Don't answer to From: address! Mail to this account are droped if not recieved via mailinglist. To contact me direct create the mail address by concatenating my forename to my senders domain.
