i see your point. there are some pros and cons! concerning the example you mentioned: only because we already have such a situation within the code base it isn't a legitimation to continue with this approach. (we need at least a discussion.) in the end we might have several parts which are "acceptable" to duplicate. -> -1 for such an approach (if there are/will be too many duplicate parts).
however, maybe there is a different approach! regards, gerhard 2008/5/22 Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > -1 Myfaces commons utils is not the place for this. MyFaces core should > not have to depend on the commons project to run. Plus the myfaces commons > utils is a snapshot and not going to release any time soon. Making Trinidad > dependent on this package would mean we can't release util the commons utils > does. > > I don't like duping code either, but Trinidad added a bunch of duped code > from MyFaces for it's configurators, so there is a prescidence. IMO, > duplicating a small amount of code is preferable to adding at least 3 jar > dependencies and making the core dependent on a util library. > > Scott > > > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> hello, >> >> for the patches of TRINIDAD-1088 i used the source code of the myfaces >> state manager to detect duplicate component id's. >> >> i don't like to have duplicate source code! >> >> what's your opinion about moving all shared source code like this to a >> 'commons' module like the already existing myfaces-commons-utils? >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
