I can understand what you are saying but I don't agree on the order. I think that the restructuring of tomahawk should come *before* deciding on a separate facelets and commons project. The reason I feel this is that I think that the scope of a new facelets project greatly depends on if tomahawk will support facelets itself or not.
One of proposed reasons for a facelets project was to add tomahawk facelets support. This, IMO should be part of Tomahawk as outlined. Therefore, this vote should precede the facelets project vote. -Andrew On 10/30/07, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From what little I understand of maven, this looks like a good idea. > > However, I think that with the proposal of a MyFaces Basics/Commons > project and a MyFaces Facelets project, that Tomahawk restructuring > should wait a few days. I'm still not seeing any consensus on what > these projects are going to contain or look like. It seems like > everyone has a slightly-different idea. I'd recommend that we > postpone redesigning Tomahawk's layout until we know how these two > pieces are going to fit in. > > A lack of feedback is probably not a sufficient reason to push forward > for a major restructuring. > > On 10/30/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, there really hasn't been any feedback on this thread: > > > > Original thread: > > Refactoring of tomahawk project (spawned from facelets discussion) > > Link: > > http://tinyurl.com/2gnpqd > > > > So I figure that no news is good news? I'd like to take a vote/poll so > > that we can move this issue along and see if we can get Tomahawk with > > Facelets support. > > > > Vote: > > > > [ ] +1 for those that have reviewed the new folder structure and approve of > > it > > [ ] +0 for those not against it or necessarily for it > > [ ] -1 for those that oppose it and reasons and suggested changes to > > the structure. > > > > -Andrew > > >
