But that thread is from Jun 04 - that is very nearly 3 months ago. Since then, nothing as far as I know.

Zubin Wadia schrieb:
Simon,

You can do a search for Subject = '[OT] JSF 2.0' on the Dev list.

I believe that discussion, begun by MW turned into a discussion about branch creation... then a couple of +1s followed.... and I assume that's where the branch was born.

Cheers,

Zubin.

On 8/28/08, *Simon Kitching* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

    I see from the commit list that a new JSF2.0 branch has been created.

    I don't remember seeing *any* kind of discussion or even
    announcement about this. While I am happy to see JSF2.0 work going
    on, this kind of approach does not seem to be at all in the
    "community" spirit. IMO, major events like this should be
    discussed beforehand.

    One issue, for example, is that the core-1.2 stuff is currently
    half-way-converted from the trinidad plugins to the
    myfaces-builder-plugin. So now it is branched, any changes need to
    be applied in two places.

    In addition, a large amount of code has just been committed by
    someone (slessard) who is not a particularly regular contributor
    to myfaces. Where did this code come from? Do we need a code grant
    for it? Note that when code is developed iteratively on the dev
    list then there is no need for a grant. But a sudden code dump is
    different, even when contributed by someone who has signed a CLA.

    And with 3 branches to now maintain, we need to discuss whether
    and when we phase out maintenance of the jsf-1.1 branch. Currently
    when users provide patches in jira, they almost always provide a
    patch against only one version and the committer ports it, which
    does increase the load on existing committers. When do we stop
    asking committers to do this when patching bugs?

    To repeat, I'm *happy* that jsf2.0 implementation is in progress,
    and appreciate people contributing time to write an
    ASF-2.0-licensed implementation. But it is a  standard saying at
    Apache that "community is more important than code", and the
    "community" aspect here seems to have been rather neglected...

    Regards,
    Simon



Reply via email to