At the end, this is open source. I would go for 1.2 and if someone is interested in the 1.1 version, then they are free (and more than welcome!) to do the job. 1.2 provides new and interesting features and we have to keep our APIs evolving to be competitive and, moreover, experiment/research with the technology giving it more value...
Cheers! Bruno On 06/12/2007, Volker Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > i'm not going to vote here, but if i would my vote where -1. > > A minimum, requirement of jsf1.2 makes this worthless for me, because > i don't think that we could switch to 1.2 the next years. > > The current commons-components, commons-validators (and commons-utils > ?) are 1.1 compatible afaik. So why making a 1.1 branch later? just > rename trunk to branches/1.1 and we are done. I already thinking about > to use the EnumConverter in our 1.1 app. > > > Regards, > Volker > > 2007/12/5, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Lets make the myfaces commons JSF API an official vote so we can have > > a fixed time frame on this decision > > > > +1 [ ] -- make JSF 1.2 the minimum requirement for the new myfaces > > commons project > > +0 [ ] -- you don't mind supporting a 1.1 trunk in addition to a 1.2 trunk > > -1 [ ] -- you feel that 1.1 should be required and why you feel that > > it is needed > > > > My vote: +1 > > > > -Andrew > > >
