Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: > Hi Werner, > > I understand your points. > > I am wondering, why this was not discussed, or did I just miss the thread? > I saw your emails in the past on dojo integration, but nothing on a > topic like "should we introduce dojo 0.4". >
> Thanks to SVN blame (Revision: 473277) I couldn't find a jira issue for > that... > We should at least log stuff like that to jira, not only to be able to > put some comments to the release notes. > > Would be great to have a discussion/comments/votes on updates like that. > > Please try to keep those basic rules in mind for the future. > > Thanks, > Matthias > > BTW. what is > myfaces/tomahawk/trunk/core/src/main/resources/org/apache/myfaces/custom/dojo/resource/Storage_version6.swf > > > Does dojo now need swf files? Are swf files (binary) fine with the ASF > license rules? > Ahm sorry to intercept here, the swf file is a dojo related thing. I have not looked to deeply into it yet (it is #2 on my todo list regarding dojo) i suspect it is one of the dojo internal data transport layers or svg related, but not sure yet. I assume the file itself is in a bsd licence like dojo itself, but I want to get rid of it anyway for one reason or the other (the file has caused problems regarding logs etc...) As for the swf format, dont know, but I am quite confident that we can eliminate it without any huge hazzles from the codebase if needed. Anyway, the update is done, +1 for leaving the codebase in unless something serious arises. I just would have preferred to have it the usual way with a voting upfront, I want to avoid situations where we have it in and I cannot test upfront or have tested upfront and am aware of showstoppers which could cause major problems. This also would give the other component devs some time to adjust their components to api changes (there have been a few) upfront without running into bug reports later on.
