Well, but Stan has coded a lot, so we still want to have this code in.
And from the performance measurements we've done last week, I think that JBoss might have a reason to switch back to MyFaces as well, if the RI JSF1.2 implementation isn't improved a lot. regards, Martin On 5/16/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm -1 on the 1.2 branch. There are major issues to be fixed in the core right now. (See TOMAHAWK-416 and related dev discussions.) I know that Stan is anxious but given the lack of interest in the core trunk, its hard to imagine we have enough support to sustain this branch. Do we have firm committments from anyone else besides Stan? Sean On 5/12/06, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > Dennis, I don't think that a vote is necessary now. Just get the jsf > > 1.2 stuff up and working (EL, TCK, ...). We will do the vote as soon > > as we are ready to merge the new code down to the trunk. > How long do we think this might take? > > We should be aware that we have to do bug fixing on two branches head + > jsf.1.2. > Merge down might no longer work then. > Instead of merge down the jsf 1.2 should replace the trunk then, no? > > In the meantime one should be responsible to ensure that all commits to > head should also go to the jsf 1.2 branch (maybe adapted if the patch is > not compatible). > "Responsible" here doesnt mean that the one should do it, but to urge > the committer to do so - A supervisor. > Any volunteer? > > Ciao, > Mario > >
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
