@Sean: I can't move to Glassfish - I'll never get through with that with my administration people, no chance. And Stan said he's halfway there.
Plus (and most important): I intend to solve the content interweaving _without_ TC6. @Craig: We can certainly release a not TCK tested version - we can just not call it TCK compliant. regards, Martin On 5/24/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do we have an ETA on Tomcat 6? Sean On 5/24/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 5/24/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As far as I can see, we never ever try to release a version out of the > > > 1.2tc6 branch. So no need to do any special maintainance with this > > > branch - just an archive. > > > > This part confuses me. I was under the impression that Stan was 90% > > of the way there. So why would we plan on abandoning this work in > > favor of a watered down version? I still haven't heard a compelling > > reason for two different branches for JSF 1.2 supported by two > > different groups of MyFaces committers. We've got 5 - 6 active > > committers that work on the core on a regular basis. > > > > If what Stan has done independently doesn't suit us, then we can > > choose to ignore it. (I can't say since I haven't looked at it.) But > > I don't think we should just throw it in to SVN and then start working > > on a less complete version that works on Tomcat 5. What features of > > JSF 1.2 that don't require Tomcat do people think we need right *now*? > > > There's a separate issue as well ... a partial implementation of 1.2 > couldn't pass the TCK, and therefore couldn't be released, either. > > > > Ciao, > > > Mario > > > > Sean > > > > Craig > >
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
