>From: "Adam Winer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I think Gary means > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/maven/ > ... along with the other myfaces maven plugins. >
Yeah, that's what I meant. > My main concerns about moving our plugins over to > the myfaces/maven directory are: > - The i18n and xrts plugins are somewhat Trinidad-specific > - We (currently) need 1.2 branches of the faces and tagdoc plugins. > What's the history behind the xrts strategy for creating resources? Was that borrowed for UIX/Cabo? > Though this suggests another task - we should see how much > work it would be to make the 1.0.2 core run against the current > "1.2" plugins - I think the 1.2 faces plugin still has a mode for > generating 1.1 components/etc. This'd get us out of the game of > releasing separate 1.0.x and 1.2.x plugins, which'd be a big > improvement! > I'm not familiar with the faces plugin but I noticed the code generation is different between Trinidad and Myfaces 1.2. How does this magic work? Are there templates or java source that generates the classes based on the xml configs? > -- Adam > > > > On 8/25/07, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > Let me think about this, but I tried to move the JDEV plugin to maven > > plugins, no luck so far.... > > > > > > On 8/26/07, Gary VanMatre wrote: > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > From: "Adam Winer" > > > > Today, our repository looks like: > > > > trunk > > > > trinidad > > > > plugins > > > > > > > > branches > > > > trinidad-xyz-branch > > > > trinidad > > > > plugins > > > > etc.... > > > > > > > > tags > > > > maven-plugin-parent-1... > > > > trinidad-1... > > > > > > > > What's weird here is that we release and tag the plugins independently > > > > of the core, but we still maintain the trunk and branches with these > > > > two > > > > together. > > > > > > > > Going forward, I suspect we'll want the ability to do quick releases > > > > of the core without touching the plugins. (I'm tempted to do a 1.0.3 > > > > release in the near future.) But as long as our trunk repository is > > > > what it is, that doesn't seem that feasible. And I don't see any reason > > > > why we shouldn't be able to do a quick plugins release to resolve > > > > any Myfaces Core issues without touching the rest of Trinidad. > > > > > > > > So: my proposal is that we should redo the repos to be: > > > > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/trinidad/core > > > > trunk > > > > branches > > > > tags > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/trinidad/plugins > > > > trunk > > > > branches > > > > tags > > > > > > > > ... and let the two release independently. There still > > > > would be cases (potentially many) where we have to > > > > release plugins, then the core, in lockstep. This would > > > > have been true for 1.0.1 and 1.0.2, for instance. But it'd > > > > definitely better reflect our tagging strategy. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe the trinidad plugins should be move to myfaces/maven since JSF 1.2 > > > has > a dependency? > > > > > > > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > >
