Hi Manfred!
> There are actually two questions to solve:
>  * should we move DummyForm to tomahawk at all?
>   
At least we have to move DummyForm out of shared as it didnt work in
this "refactored" environment. I already wrote about the problem.
> If the answer to the first question is "yes" the answer to the latter
> must be: "now - the sooner the better"
>   
+1
> My feeling is that we should do it and upon releasing tell the users
> why we did it. We might break some users apps, but we have a good
> point: The user's app won't run on any other JSF impl anyway.
>   
Yes, that also why it think we can implement this feature for t:command*
ONLY!
>> Shall we tell the user to change those links to t:command* tags, or are
>> we willing to provide overloaded renderers through
>> tomahawk/faces-config.xml?
>>     
>
> Yes, that would be the consequence of the move.
>   
The above allows a decision ;-)
If we provide overloaded renderers it can start working with h:command*
again.

>> The latter again is error prone, as then it is very likely to run in the
>> "order of faces-config.xml processing" problem and our renderer might
>> mask or might be masked by another one.
>>     
>
> Well, this is always a problem. Also when the feature stays in impl.
> Or do I miss something?
>   
Currently the base classes for the command* tags (in shared) implement
the functionality of dummyForm, this is why its not needed to have the
"overloaded renderer" stuff and why it works with h: and t:


Ciao,
Mario

Reply via email to