hello jan-kees, first of all: thank you for your contributions!
i had a quick look at some of your patches. and i compared them with the snapshot version of mojarra + the javadoc [1] the patches i compared look similar to the current source code of the snapshot (method order, var names,...) and also some javadoc comments are the same (example for the javadoc: [2] and [3]). there are also classes with slight variations. anyway, we have to take care that we don't violate the licenses used by mojarra (cddl and gpl). regards, gerhard [1] https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/nonav/snapshots/pr1/javadocs/index.html [2] https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/nonav/snapshots/pr1/javadocs/javax/faces/render/RenderKitWrapper.html [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394962/RenderKitWrapper.patch 2008/12/2 Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hello same here I wanted to check in the patches on Wednesday which > currently is my JSF 2.0 day as well... > So we might be able to share the work. > Btw. Jan have you signed the CLI or CLA already? > Unfortunately we have to be a little bit nitpicky about having this signed > not to get into legal trouble ;-) > > Werner > > > Simon Lessard schrieb: > >> Hi Jan-Kees, >> >> Yeah I saw the patches, thanks for that. I'll check them in/comment them >> on Wednesday evening which is my JSF 2.0 day. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> ~ Simon >> >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >> From my point of view, it's nice to do something back to the >> community, instead of only using MyFaces... >> >> I've been implementing some classes yesterday. Created a Jira ticket >> for all of them (sometimes grouped similar classes together). >> >> Please look at it and tell me if this is the right way to do things. >> I'm sure there are things to improve. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jan-Kees >> >> @Matthias: Good to hear my help is appreciated. >> >> >> 2008/12/1 Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: >> > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 1:21 AM, Simon Lessard >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Yes you can, but make sure to create a JIRA ticket for every >> change. You'll >> >> find that most new classes and methods are already there though, >> but some >> >> new ones just popped with the public review version. >> > >> > it is great to see more and more active folks here! >> > >> > -Matthias >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> ~ Simon >> >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> All right, in that case, shall I start implementing those new >> API classes? >> >>> >> >>> I'm sure there's little fun for you guys in implementing all those >> >>> interfaces/etc. ;-) >> >>> >> >>> /Jan-Kees >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 2008/11/29 Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: >> >>> > Hi Jan-Kees, >> >>> > >> >>> > MyFaces has its own version of the javax.faces.8 within >> myfaces-api.jar >> >>> > file. That file obviously has the same content as Mojarra's, >> but with >> >>> > different code and thus a different bug/peformance base. >> However I must >> >>> > admit that most difference reside within the -impl >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > Regards, >> >>> > >> >>> > ~ Simon >> >>> > >> >>> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel >> >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Hi all, >> >>> >> >> >>> >> It might be a stupid question, but where does the MyFaces >> javax.faces >> >>> >> codebase come from? Is it copied straight from Mojarra? Or >> does this >> >>> >> cause >> >>> >> licensing issues and must all files be created by hand, >> based on the >> >>> >> spec? >> >>> >> >> >>> >> A.t.m., many of the new classes, like the pdl.facelets >> package are >> >>> >> missing. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> If you guys want, I can start adding them to myfaces2 if it >> needs to be >> >>> >> done by hand. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Regards, >> >>> >> Jan-Kees >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 2008/11/27 Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> I don't think just dropping the code will be enough. There >> are some >> >>> >>> contract difference between Facelets and Facelets in JSF >> 2.0. Although >> >>> >>> they're mostly compatible, some interfaces were added (see >> pdl) and >> >>> >>> the >> >>> >>> createView contract was changed as well (forcing full tree >> population >> >>> >>> that >> >>> >>> doesn't seem to be the case in Facelets code atm). >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Furthermore, imho it's quite healthy to fork the code as >> it's going to >> >>> >>> start an improvement "competition" between Mojarra's >> Facelets and our >> >>> >>> Facelets, much like what happened when MyFaces was first >> implemented, >> >>> >>> much >> >>> >>> faster than RI at the time, forcing the latter to improve >> their own >> >>> >>> code and >> >>> >>> so on. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> That being said, if the community feels like we should >> limit the >> >>> >>> amount >> >>> >>> of changes as much as possible (to include Facelets updates >> and bug >> >>> >>> fixes >> >>> >>> every now and then for example), I could also abide to that. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Regards, >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> ~ Simon >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 3:26 AM, Werner Punz >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> >>> >>> wrote: >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> Kito Mann schrieb: >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> Hey Simon, >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> Just curious: are you guys implementing Facelets from >> scratch? >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>> I have not had a look yet at the current codebase, but to my >> >>> >>>> knowledge >> >>> >>>> facelets itself has been relizenced under ASF2 >> >>> >>>> I would suggest just for the sake of keeping the >> compatibility close >> >>> >>>> no reimplementation just drag the code over, dont change >> the packages >> >>> >>>> if possible so that we at least there have a shared codebase. >> >>> >>>> It just does not make sense to do a full reimplementation or >> >>> >>>> to fork the code, since there are no political issues >> between the RI >> >>> >>>> and >> >>> >>>> MyFaces, on the contrary we have an excellent relationship! >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> Werner >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Matthias Wessendorf >> > >> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> > >> >> >> > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
