What is the problem having a taglib in the jar?
2007/10/31, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On 10/31/07, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > > > which is itself an "umbrella" project for two artifacts** called > > > > "MyFaces JSF Commons Utils" and "MyFaces JSF Commons Components" > > > > > > I suggest that I prepare an initial setup, and check it in, so that > > > there is some concrete stuff we can talk about. > > > Ok? > > I still don't get why we should increase the number of modules here. > > Two artifacts means two jars, no? > Yes, sure. > > > > And then, what is a Component? I think we agreed that we just want to > > add render-less components, no? Else it has to go into tomahawk. The > > Commons should not be just a "component-library without (the dreaded) > > shared". > > > > Is a UrlNavigationHandler a Component then or a util? It has no > > component yet, but what if it has one in the future? > > I know, we then can simply just add this component to the Components, > > but why should we split the stuff? > > > > In this case I'd have a > org.apache.myfaces.commons.urlNavigationHandler > > package where everything lives in. > > > > org.apache.myfaces.commons.urlNavigationHandler (the api) > > org.apache.myfaces.commons.urlNavigationHandler.impl > > org.apache.myfaces.commons.urlNavigationHandler.component > > etc > > > > > > > Also renderkit independent "components" need a taglib in the META-INF dir. > This is the main difference between a "component" and a goodie class a user > can decide to use or not. > > --Manfred > >
