well... not in muc. only "schnitzel Wiener art", which sucks. the original is the better :-)) hefeweizen kills the JSF.next :)
-M On 2/23/07, Jeff Bischoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I saw that post at the time, but figured it was the result of too much doppelbock and wienerschnitzel. ;) Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Well... there was a meeting in munich, during the october fest... > and they discussed that... > > http://wiki.java.net/bin/view/Projects/JSFDaysMunich2006 > > *snip* > Version synchronization. JSF 2.0 renamed JSF 6 to go with Java EE 6. > > perhaps it was the beer ;))) > > > On 2/23/07, Dennis Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> 6.0? Seriously? >> >> Dennis Byrne >> >> On 2/23/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > there was a wiki page which says that they want to have the next >> > version of jsf (2.0) >> > named 6.0 >> > so... I am not really seeing any reason to go from myfaces 1.2 to a >> 6 ... >> > >> > :-) >> > >> > On 2/23/07, Dennis Byrne < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > > JSF 1.1 -> MyFaces 1.x >> > > > JSF 1.2 -> MyFaces 2.x >> > > >> > > I'd rather keep the release numbers in sync with the spec numbers. >> > > >> > > 1.1 -> 1.1.x, >> > > 1.2 -> 1.2.x >> > > >> > > > Paul Spencer >> > > > >> > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> > > > > we sould do the same for core >> > > > > >> > > > > next is 1.5.0 >> > > > > >> > > > > and JSF 1.2 stuff should be changed to 2.0.0 >> > > > > >> > > > > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> 1.5.0 or 1.6.0. One is as good as the other IMO. >> > > > >> You mean 1.6.0 is better because it does not "match" the >> 1.1.5 of >> > > > >> current core? >> > > > >> I think Martin suggested 1.5.0 because it would be in the >> style of >> > > > >> Tomcat 5.0.x vs Tomcat 5.5.x, right? >> > > > >> >> > > > >> --Manfred >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On 2/23/07, Paul Spencer < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > > >> > If the version of Tomahawk is not tied to the version of >> MyFaces, >> > > then >> > > > >> > how about the NEXT version of Tomahawk be 1.6? >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > This would allow Tomahawk, like Tobago, to be version >> independently >> > > > >> of MyFaces. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Paul Spencer >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Martin Marinschek wrote: >> > > > >> > > slightly too late, but 1.1.5 would have been my option as >> well. >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > other option: 1.5 - and let tomahawk and impl version >> numbers >> get >> > > > >> out of >> > > > >> > > sync. >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > regards, >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Martin >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> Ok, thanks for your feedback. >> > > > >> > >> Branch 1.1.5 created. >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> --Manfred >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> On 2/23/07, Wendy Smoak < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> > > > >> > >> > On 2/23/07, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > >> > > The new tomahawk release number is a trade-off. >> > > > >> > >> > > We must decide between >> > > > >> > >> > > - releasing tomahawk 1.1.4 which is not compatible to >> core >> > > > >> 1.1.4 and >> > > > >> > >> > > therefore might confuse users >> > > > >> > >> > > - skipping tomahawk 1.1.4, stay in sync with core and >> have a >> > > > >> > >> tomahawk >> > > > >> > >> > > 1.1.5 that is 100% compatible to the current core 1.1.5 >> > > > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > +1 for Tomahawk 1.1.5 this time around, which will be >> > > > >> compatible with >> > > > >> > >> > Core 1.1.5. >> > > > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > (There is plenty of information in the archives if anyone >> asks >> > > > >> "what >> > > > >> > >> > happened" to 1.1.4. As Paul points out, Tomcat skips >> version >> > > > >> numbers >> > > > >> > >> > in their public release series.) >> > > > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > -- >> > > > >> > >> > Wendy >> > > > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Dennis Byrne >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Matthias Wessendorf >> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh >> > >> > further stuff: >> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf >> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Dennis Byrne > >
-- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
