+1 on Martin. Eventuelly I'd like to join as an individual. but Martin should be the ASF JSF guy.
-Matthias On 6/8/06, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/7/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, Jacob asked me if I'd like to join up. If I'd join, then as an > individual. Why not as the official ASF representative for JSF.next? Of course there should be an official vote, but from my POV there speaks nothing against you joining as a representative. And I have the feeling that others think similarly. ;-) > I have some very specific ideas about JSF 2.0, though. On more good reason for you becoming the official ASF/JSF.next guy ;-) Manfred > > regards, > > Martin > > > On 6/7/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > tracking system), but there hasn't been a formal roadmap for JSF.next > > > > > > so is JSF.next the project name for it? > > > > > > > > No, "JSF.next" is shorthand for "whatever version follows JSF 1.2 . > Without a formal roadmap, there's no guarantee that the next version will > actually be 2.0 (although that seems most likely to me). But the real > roadmap could, for example, contemplate an intermediate 1.3 version with > more incremental changes before a next major version. > > > > As a historical note, the JSP version in J2EE 1.3 was numbered 1.2. The > original JSR for JCP to be included in J2EE 1.4 was proposed as 1.3, but the > scope of the changes that the EG took on was so large that it became obvious > that "JSP 2.0" was a much better identifier. So, to avoid confusion, within > Sun we've started talking about "xxx.next" as being the next version of > "xxx", leaving the precise identiier to be determined later. > > > > > > > > > > that happens, it would be very much appropriate that Apache have a > > > > representative on the EG, and it would seem to make the most sense > that this > > > > rep be someone from the MyFaces community. > > > > > > Manfred is already there. I think Martin is interested too. > > > > > > > > Cool. However, we'll want to figure out which particular person to > nominate as the official Apache representative ... in general, JCP expert > groups have only one representative from a particular organization (but that > person can generally communicate to others within the organization to build > consensus, and then represent the organization's view back to the EG). It's > also possible for additional folks to become EG members as individuals, at > the discretion of the spec lead(s). > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > > > > In the interim before the formal announcement, talk to Ed Burns and > Roger > > > > Kitain, who were the co-spec leads for 1.2 (and AFAIK that's not > changing > > > > for future versions, but I'm not as intimately connected with the > specs > > > > world in my Creator architect role -- instead, I'm a customer :-) > about the > > > > kinds of areas you would like to see a 2.0 spec cover. > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Craig McClanahan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > CONVERTER_ID = "javax.faces.DoubleTime " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looks like a spec bug due to a cut-n-paste error in the RI's API > > > > classes. > > > > > > If so, the correct thing to do would be to report feedback via the > > > > website > > > > > > on the spec cover ( > > > > > > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net > ) so > > > > that > > > > > > it can get addressed as an errata, or included in a maintenance > version > > > > of > > > > > > the 1.2 spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > Until then, though, I'd recommend you keep it ... this is the kind > of > > > > > > mechanical detail that the API signature tests in the TCK will > likely > > > > flag > > > > > > if it's missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Any reason for keeping [1] ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://tinyurl.com/gjdxe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Ah, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks. Some are some issues also the reasons, why > UIComponent is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > an interface? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Adam Winer < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Backwards compatibility - at least of a sort; you won't > get > > > > > > > > > > AbstractMethodErrors when using 1.1-compiled subclasses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does anybody know why the methods added to ViewHandler > or > > > > > > > > > > > ExternalContext in 1.2 are not abstract, like their > *old* JSF > > > > 1.1 > > > > > > > > > > > counterparts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > > > > > blog: > http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > >
-- Matthias Wessendorf Aechterhoek 18 48282 Emsdetten blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
