On 9/13/06, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think this is going too far. A jar for shared utility code, validators, converters, and non-rendering components makes sense. Possibly even non-rendering tags (like t:updateActionListener). As a facelets user, I could see the usefulness of a jar for taglib code, but I honestly doubt it's worth the hassle. Functionality, it doesn't add anything to have this division.
I'm okay with splitting Tomahawk into multiple jars, as long as they are versioned and released together. Calling one of these jars 'myfaces-components-commons' to indicate that it can be used without Tomahawk, is also fine. I'm not in favor of establishing a commons module that gets versioned separately. Having to branch Shared for every release of core and tomahawk is bad enough already. If it's possible, I'd almost rather make the common code part of Shared, since that already has to be branched for every release. Is the goal simply to share code between Tomahawk and Tobago, or do we also want make a commons jar available to users? -- Wendy
