It's possible, but weird things can happen. For instance, we now cache the MyFaces TLD globally. So, the standard JSF taglibs are available to all web apps regardless of classloader settings. When you try to use the RI you get conflicts because the MyFaces versions of these taglibs are called. To get the RI to work at all you have to either disable the cache or remove the MyFaces jars completely.
I already created a task a few weeks ago to log an info message about this. So, at the very least users will get some helpful information about the choices they need to make. Right now they just get nasty error messages. Stan Silvert JBoss, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] callto://stansilvert > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacob Hookom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:16 AM > To: MyFaces Development > Subject: Re: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces Committers/Contributors meeting > > I think it depends on the classloader... I wonder if the fact that you > can specify an alternate Lifecycle on the FacesServlet mapping would > allow you to hijack the implementation on a per webapp basis with JSF 1.2. > > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > that's my understanding as well. > > > > the only "problem" in my POV is that people might be wondering why the > > Myfaces-jars inside their WEB-INF/lib might be ignored (JavaEE 5). > > > > Will there be a logger-warning message ? > > > > -Matthias > > > > On 5/11/06, Stan Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I don't see any reason why you couldn't do that. We have people today > >> who remove MyFaces so they can use the RI. > >> > >> Stan Silvert > >> JBoss, Inc. > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> callto://stansilvert > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Martin Marinschek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 4:16 AM > >> > To: MyFaces Development > >> > Subject: Re: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces Committers/Contributors > >> meeting > >> > > >> > Stan, > >> > > >> > will it be possible to configure another JSF 1.2 implementation in > >> > JBoss, when the release is out? Meaning - will it be possible to put > >> > the RI out and MyFaces (in a 1.2 compatible version) in, if that is > >> > desired by the user? > >> > > >> > regards, > >> > > >> > Martin > >> > > >> > On 5/10/06, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > Dennis Byrne schrieb: > >> > > >> Also, JBoss has decided to use the RI instead of MyFaces for > >> JBoss 5. > >> > > >> The decision was purely one of time and resources. By shipping > >> the > >> > RI > >> > > >> we will be able to pass the JEE 5 TCK sooner. > >> > > > > >> > > > We need to branch for 1.2 and get moving. > >> > > > > >> > > Btw. if anyone has not noticed yet, Craig pointed out at JAX a huge > >> > > "political" issue with JSF 1.2 > >> > > > >> > > As of JEE 5 the webcontainers are not allowed in their classloader > >> > > hierarchy to make the jsf implementation overridable via a > >> WEB-INF/lib > >> > > jsf (as far as I understood, Craig correct me there if I am wrong). > >> > > > >> > > So it will become way harder to push a new jsf implementation into > a > >> > > webapp as soon as an application moves from a plain servlet runner > >> > > towards Tomcat. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Werner > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > http://www.irian.at > >> > > >> > Your JSF powerhouse - > >> > JSF Consulting, Development and > >> > Courses in English and German > >> > > >> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > >> > > > > > > > -- > -------------------------- > Sent from my FrankenBerry Wireless Handheld
