Sounds good to me (both grouping and a prominent mention of incubator status.)

Adam


On 2/27/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Concerning JIRA, my preference would be to add an ADF faces JIRA
> project and group it together with MyFaces (like we have done for
> Tomahawk and Tobago.)  We can mention the incubator status in the
> project description.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/27/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That will be infrastructure - whoever takes on the task of doing so.
> >
> > I don't think that the incubator PMC is voting though, I think the
> > proposal was silently ignored now for a week or so.
> >
> > Craig, do you know anything? You're on the incubator PMC, right?
> >
> > I suggested to Manfred to resend it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - don't know
> > if he's done that so far.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 2/27/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Great, looking forward to some good news!
> > >
> > > One more question - assuming the incubator proposal comes back with
> > > thumbs up, who takes on the work of getting the repository set up?
> > > One reason I ask is that I'd like to do a new drop of our source code,
> > > since obviously we haven't stopped working since the first drop.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Adam
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/27/06, Omar Tazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hi Adam,
> > > >
> > > > Manfred submitted the incubation proposal to the incubator PMC. I assume
> > > > they are currently voting on it and will let us know (hopefully anytime
> > > > now) what the result is. Almost there :)
> > > >
> > > > -Omar
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Adam Winer wrote:
> > > > > Good question...  when the Incubator process kicks in
> > > > > (when *is* that gonna be?  any news?) will we add a JIRA
> > > > > project then, or does that need to wait 'til we leave the
> > > > > incubator?
> > > > >
> > > > > FWIW, the ADF code has no problems with adding components
> > > > > during Render Response - some of our components do just
> > > > > that.  We *do* replace the renderer for HtmlCommandLink, partly
> > > > > so that our client-side validation code fires with h:commandLink
> > > > > or af:commandLink, but also from some other issues that have
> > > > > skipped my memory at the moment.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only thing I can imagine in this specific instance if absolutely
> > > > > nothing is rendering for it is that our replaced commandLink renderer
> > > > > will refuse to do anything if it isn't inside of a form.  If memory 
> > > > > serves,
> > > > > it logs a warning in this case.  Could you check that you're using
> > > > > a form (either h:form or af:form, we don't care which)?
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Adam
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2/26/06, Dennis Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >> Please put this in the tomahawk JIRA; at least then it is recorded.  
> > > > >> We currently don't have an ADF category.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> @devs - what are our options for *not* losing info like this?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Dennis Byrne
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >>> From: Claudio Tasso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >>> Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 05:00 AM
> > > > >>> To: [email protected]
> > > > >>> Subject: ADF Renderer-Kit and Tomahawk incompatibility
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hi,
> > > > >>> I'm using the latest version of  Tomahawk (nightly) and ADF 
> > > > >>> (10.1.3.04).
> > > > >>> ADF requires the installation of its custom RendererKit
> > > > >>> (oracle.adf.core), but it does not work well with some Tomahawk 
> > > > >>> components.
> > > > >>> For example, let's examine the HtmlDataScrollerRenderer, which 
> > > > >>> creates a
> > > > >>> HtmlCommandLink during the  encoding  of the HtmlDataScroller 
> > > > >>> component.
> > > > >>> This is the code which creates the HtmlCommandLink:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> HtmlCommandLink link = (HtmlCommandLink) application
> > > > >>>                        
> > > > >>> .createComponent(HtmlCommandLink.COMPONENT_TYPE);
> > > > >>> ....
> > > > >>> scroller.getChildren().add(link);
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> It seems to be quite standard: the compoent is created and the it's
> > > > >>> added to the HtmlDataScroller componet.
> > > > >>> This code works very well when the faces-config.xml DOES NOT 
> > > > >>> contain the
> > > > >>> following line:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> <default-render-kit-id>oracle.adf.core</default-render-kit-id>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> But when this line is inserted, the HtmlCommandLink does not appear 
> > > > >>> in
> > > > >>> the rendered page which is sent to the browser as HTML.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I suppose that the Oracle Renderer does not like that  a new 
> > > > >>> component
> > > > >>> is added to the component tree during the Render Response phase.
> > > > >>> So, my question is the following: who is wrong?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I'm not a great expert of the JSF specification, but I don't rember
> > > > >>> anything which forbids the dinamically creation of components 
> > > > >>> during the
> > > > >>> render response phase.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Is it an ADF bug or a Tomahawk bug?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>

Reply via email to