On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > New documentation for myfaces-builder-plugin is available at > myfaces-builder-plugin site: > > http://myfaces.apache.org/build-tools/plugins/myfaces-builder-plugin/index.html > > I hope this helps people develop components using this tool. > > I think (my personal opinion) it is better release myfaces-builder-plugin > and annotations, then myfaces archetypes (to release an archetype using
+1 on the release; > myfaces-builder-plugin) and finally if no objections, commit the code > proposed in the patch. hrm, not sure. My feeling is that it maybe OK since it has no negative side effect, right ? However, I'd prefer a more stable impl of these artifacts before we add them to the trinidad 1.2. trunk... -M > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Simon Kitching <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Leonardo Uribe schrieb: >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected] >>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > >>> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Leonardo Uribe <[email protected] >>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > > Hi >>> > > >>> > > It could be good to add myfaces-builder-annotations to trinidad >>> > 1.2.x, doing >>> > > a modification on maven-faces-plugin. >>> > >>> > please note, that Trinidad still uses the "trinidad-maven" stuff >>> > >>> > looking at the POMs: >>> > <builder-plugin.version>1.0.3-SNAPSHOT</builder-plugin.version> >>> > >>> > >>> > <builder-annotations.version>1.0.3-SNAPSHOT</builder-annotations.version> >>> > >>> > are there released version of these plugins ? Trinidad does >>> > releases >>> > on a frequent cycle, >>> > so we somewhat require a released version of the plugins. >>> > >>> > >>> > On the patch there is used 1.0.3-SNAPSHOT, but I have tested it with >>> > 1.0.2 and >>> > everything works fine. The idea is use 1.0.2. But in my latest code I >>> > tried to generate >>> > all files, to check that myfaces-builder-plugin can do it. I founded >>> > some problems, and >>> > did some fixes on 1.0.3-SNAPSHOT. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > There is a working patch on TRINIDAD-1409, but the idea for now >>> > is >>> > only add >>> > > annotations for components and update trinidad sandbox, because >>> > some bugs in >>> > > qdox(not parse enums correctly) and myfaces-builder-plugin 1.0.2 >>> > (not handle >>> > > converter hierarchy) are present. >>> > > >>> > > I would like to hear what people think about it before commit >>> > this code. >>> > > This change does not change any code generation procedure for >>> > trinidad, and >>> > >>> > So, we still read the our own metadata, right ? You just add these >>> > annotations >>> > and they aren't really used ? Or what are you saying. >>> > >>> > >>> > I *think* that there is some future work in the pipeline to enhance >>> > the Trinidad metadata, >>> > to support the JSR-276 metadata thing. >>> > >>> > >>> > Right now, trinidad sandbox needs to duplicate .xml files to create >>> > one >>> > component >>> > (take a look at trinidad sandbox build project). The idea is just add >>> > this annotations on >>> > trinidad so trinidad sandbox can use myfaces-builder-plugin to generate >>> > components >>> > (including in trinidad jars myfaces-metadata.xml). >>> > >>> > In other words, trinidad project still uses config files on >>> > trinidad-build project. >>> > myfaces-builder-annotations are just source retention annotations, so >>> > no >>> > changes are >>> > present on compiled files. >>> > >>> > >>> > > the intention is just help developers making custom trinidad >>> > components. >>> > >>> > how does that help `? >>> > >>> > >>> > With this change, there is no need of use trinidad sandbox build >>> > project >>> > to create >>> > custom components, replacing it with myfaces-builder-plugin stuff. >>> >>> Quick note: before the "myfaces-builder-plugin" stuff becomes usable by >>> normal mortals, it does need some better documentation. >>> >>> I tried to do this some months ago, but could not figure out what many >>> of the annotations were for... >> >> Ok, I'll enhance current documentation to make it more readable. >> >> regards >> >> Leonardo Uribe >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Simon >> > > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
