I would go for:

+1 on JSF 1.2 only

This is open source, so no one is required to use it and embracing 1.2
is only going to help the development community move forward.

+0.5 on 1.1 support with JDK 1.5 required on both.

Just because the specification supports 1.4 does mean libraries have
to. JDK 1.5 has been out plenty long enough for companies to adopt it.
If they cannot adopt it, they should be willing to forgo new libraries
and functionality

-1 on 1.1 w/ 1.4

This is too much work and will really hold nicer features back (I also
would have no interest in developing and testing it personally).

Just my $.02

-Andrew

On Nov 29, 2007 10:06 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2007 5:57 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > I'm going to try to put together a proposal for some items it add to the
> > jsf commons fairly soon for your purusal.  First off, however, I'd like
> > some technical information on this project as it may effect how the
> > project is set up.
> >
> > 1. Which version of JSF will be the minimum for this project?  One of my
> > proposals involves needing an ExternalContextWrapper and the version of
> > JSF does make a difference.  I, personally, would like to see this based
> > off 1.2 but if we need a 1.1 Faces Commons then I would recommend both a
> > 1.1 and a 1.2 branch.
>
> here we go;
> my understanding is, that 1.1 is a must
>
> >
> > 2. What is the minimum JDK we are going to use for this project.  My
> > preference would be J2SE 5 for the build.  I could even live with making
> > sure that code can be compiled with J2SE 5 in 1.4 compatibility mode but
> > I think we need to be able to support generics at the very least.  Of
> > course if we're basing the commons project off of JSF 1.2, J2SE5 is a
> > no-brainer.  :)
>
> JSF 1.1 => java1.4
> JSF 1.2 => JDK5
>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
>

Reply via email to