Manfred, can you go ahead with that 1.2 branch?

regards,

Martin

On 5/18/06, Thomas Spiegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm having a look at tomahawk 416

+1 for creating a 1.2 branch

On 5/18/06, Stan Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have implemented most of the new core API's and fixed most of the
> deprecated ones to be backwards compatible with 1.1 (if you look at the
> 1.2 javadocs you'll see what I mean).  If you look at the section in the
> spec preface entitled "What's Changed Since the Last Release" you can
> get a feel for what I did.  I've pretty much done everything in that
> list.
>
> Most of it is covered under this issue, which just says to implement
> several sections of the spec:
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1274
>
> I believe all of 1274 is complete except
> ApplicationImpl.getResourceBundle().  I needed code that reads the new
> faces-context.xml for that one.  However, all the ELResolver stuff is
> done including the ResourceBundleELResolver.
>
> I've also done some of the issues listed under General Changes.  For
> each item in that list, I created a Jira task.  You can look at Jira and
> see which ones I did.
>
> I was just getting started on the javax.faces.webapp package when I was
> taken off of the project.  I probably won't commit any changes from
> that.  I didn't touch the components or renderer at all.  With all the
> backward-compatible code I wrote, it appears that all the components
> still work even though they are written the "1.1 way".
>
> So, hopefully, what you guys will have to start with is a JSF 1.2 impl
> that is about half-way done and still works.
>
> Stan Silvert
> JBoss, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> callto://stansilvert
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Spiegl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 4:58 PM
> > To: MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: JSF 1.2 [was: Cancelled: JavaOne MyFaces
> > Committers/Contributors meeting]
> >
> > +1 for solving tomahawk 416, being incompatible to RI is a serious
> issue
> >
> > Stan which 1.2 issues did you fix. Did you change any link renderers?
> > If not, i am
> > +1 for open a 1.2 branch
> >
> > On 5/17/06, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Sean Schofield schrieb:
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > > +1 for a fork... the reason we need to get going asap and a fork
> helps.
> > > If we wait for another bunch of issues to be fixed, this will never
> end.
> > > Sorry to say that so harsh, but the time on 1.2 is really pressing,
> > > given that there wont be an option in jee to override the default
> JSF
> > > implementation via other libs in WEB-INF/lib like it was possible in
> > JEE4
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


--
http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



--

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