Guess I didn't leave adequate time. I took the lack of response in a days time to be no negative opinion. I can always move them back out and put them into jsf-comp as I know people will make use of them. Let me know of any procedures that are in place for any new component ideas.
In the meantime, if you don't like them, I'd like to hear the opposition and the alternatives. I have yet to hear any suggestions for an adequate solution for supporting PPR re-rendering on command clicks that produce conversion and validation errors. As always, I am willing to hear alternatives. Supporting only client-side messages updates is not sufficient though to capture use cases that users will need. Message components cannot be assumed to be the only components that want to react to conversion and validation errors. On 9/3/07, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have to admit, I'm not at all convinced that either of these two > new components should be added, and think there should have > been more discussion before you'd checked them in. If we're > going to have components added without general agreement, we > need a sandbox where they can be tried out and played with. > > -- Adam > > > On 8/30/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2 questions for the Trinidad developers: > > > > (1) It seems like Trinidad is using some kind of generator for taglib, > > tld, Tag, and possibly other classes. Is this documented anywhere? I > > was looking around the SVN trunk and did not see any boilerplate or > > configuration code that would provide such information to a maven > > plugin. Can someone point me to the location in SVN that I can start > > poking around to get an understanding of how this works? > > > > (2) Are there any comments on the following enhancement "bugs" for new > > components? > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-663 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-664 > > > > If not would there be any objections to me checking in the code into > > the Trinidad trunk (once I figure out the answer to #1 of course)? > > > > Thanks, > > Andrew > > >
