For me, it would be important that this new build-system could
generate 1.1.7 and 1.2 - Leonardo, would this be possible?

regards,

Martin

On 1/30/08, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Well, the first question to ask is: what do we want to release in the near
> future?
>
> I think the next Tomahawk release should be 1.1.7, containing bugfixes and a
> few promotions from sandbox. It should not contain radical refactoring of
> the build process.
>
> In the longer term, I believe we are planning to move a bunch of existing
> code out of Tomahawk into commons. So then Tomahawk will not be a drop-in
> replacement for the old one, as pages referencing t:foo will then have to
> reference some new commons tag that provides the equivalent functionality.
>
> There is also stuff in tomahawk that needs cleaning up. For example, IMO the
> inputCalendar should be two tags; one for popup and one not. Having them as
> a single component is a major headache.
>
> And there are lots of other cleanups that could be made, eg removing bad
> ideas (I think forceId is one thing that should go completely, replaced by a
> more generic solution).
>
> So if we are going to make a non-backwards-compatible release of Tomahawk
> code, then it seems to me that we should look at whether what is left would
> cause confusion by inheriting the tomahawk name. If we only factor out 10%
> into commons, and only make significant changes to another 10% of tags, then
> yes the existing name might be reasonable. But if major changes are to be
> made, then we must change the taglib namespace and java package-name
> otherwise the new code and the old code cannot live together in the same
> app. And the easiest solution to that would be to call this significantly
> new lib something else - eg "commons ui widgets".
>
> I *do* like much of what is currently in tomahawk, and am not suggesting
> throwing the code away. But if a major refactor is applied, then we probably
> need a new name.
>
> And re the code-generation stuff: personally I don't like it at all. Agreed
> it does suck less than the old approach, but it still is ugly. I'm hoping to
> find time to experiment with some alternatives. Now of course I'm not
> suggesting that everything stop until I deliver a wonderful new solution
> :-). However given that 1.1.7 is the short-term goal, and 1.2 is
> questionable it doesn't seem a good time to be doing all that work on a
> Tomahawk 1.2 build system.
>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
>
> ---- Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > Simon,
> >
> > is your conclusion then that Tomahawk should die?
> >
> > To be honest, my perception is quite different from this.
> >
> > We have a large user-base, and I'm certainly all for keeping Tomahawk
> > up-to-date as much as possible and still improve it where we can.
> >
> > And, I generally don't see the use of having 10 different ways of
> > maintaining components in MyFaces, the first step to a more
> > maintainable Tomahawk-component-set must therefore be to change the
> > build-system to the one used by MyFaces 1.2, Trinidad and (hopefully
> > also) the new commons library!
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 1/30/08, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > As being the guy who has created the tomahawk 1.2 branch and spent a lot
> of
> > > time with it, upgrading to 1.2 is not an easy task because as Simon
> > > mentioned the code is old and crusty.
> > >
> > > I agree that non rendering stuff should be moved to commons, I've some
> > > candidates on my own from sandbox and tomahawk for commons.
> > >
> > > For autogeneration, one must generate all the component metadata, this
> all
> > > has been discussed on ML by the way.
> > >
> > > I still think tomahawk 1.2 makes sense.
> > >
> > > Cagatay
> > >
> > > On Jan 30, 2008 11:02 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 30, 2008 9:53 AM, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I see Leonard is currently doing a lot of work on something called
> > > > "tomahawk 1.2", which surprised me a little.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have checked the mail archives, and see some discussions happening
> > > > around june 2007 regarding having a version of tomahawk specifically
> for
> > > > JSF1.2.
> > > >
> > > > I saw the activity on tomahawk 1.2 as well, and was also a little
> > > > surprised, since nothing regarding that has been discussed here on the
> > > > ML.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But since then, we have started "apache commons". I think therefore
> that
> > > > rather than have a tomahawk 1.2, it would be better to split tomahawk
> up
> > > > into pieces that live in "commons" modules, or at least extract all
> the
> > > bits
> > > > we can, then call the remaining bits something other than "tomahawk".
> > > >
> > > > +1 that sounds good;
> > > >
> > > > commons can be used in a wider range (like in tobago, trinidad,
> ice-faces,
> > > > ...)
> > > > the additional UI comps (like nice (dojo-based) tables etc can become
> > > > Tomahawk)
> > > > also worth to check for promotions of the sandbox (was recently
> > > > already discussed), like
> > > > the PPR stuff.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Tomahawk code is really rather old and crusty and I don't see a lot
> of
> > > > point moving it as-is to JSF1.2.
> > > > >
> > > > > Getting a release of tomahawk 1.1.7 out, however, would be a very
> good
> > > > idea.
> > > >
> > > > +1 here as well
> > > >
> > > > -Matthias
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Simon
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Reply via email to