Wonderful news!

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Werner Punz <[email protected]> wrote:

> Btw. just a short status update on the ajax side of things,
>
> We are working actively on it as I speak but I cannot commit anything
> from Ganesh and Alexs code since I still wait for the confirmation of the
> ICLA regarding Ganesh Jung (Alex is already confirmed)
>
> So what are we doing:
>
> a) I prepared a clear api and impl divide, which is bound by configuration,
> the api basically just calls the impl class
> wich is integrated via myfaces configuration options (and hence overridable
> from the outside)
>
> b) we have three layers currently api, impl and adapters for the request
> and response handling
>
> all of them are pluggable so that they can be replaced by other
> implementations via configuration (dojo or something else)
>
> As soon as I get the missing ICLA acknowledgement and I have some time
> (which is thursday and friday) I will be able to commit all of this into the
> apache repo...
>
> So expect a bigger commit on the javascript side soon!
>
>
> Werner
>
>
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>
>  yes, correct.
>>
>> I think I should pay more attention to the (so called) open mailing list
>> (which is seriously only semi-open)
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Werner Punz <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Wonderful news...
>>>
>>> I will rework the javascript ajax apis this week on thursday.
>>> Generally there is not too much work on the api side to do
>>> a helper function has been added.
>>>
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>>
>>> Simon Lessard schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> This is a simple post to inform you that the final JSF 2.0 draft was
>>>> released yesterday
>>>> (http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pfd/jsr314/index.html) and
>>>> that
>>>> the 2.0 branch is in sync with it (at least to my knowledge). Not
>>>> everything
>>>> is integrated of course, but all API classes and methods should be there
>>>> (except enums for component attributes, I hope we can "pluginize"
>>>> those). If
>>>> you check the code you can find different kinds of TODO:
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: IMPLEMENT HERE
>>>> Means the logic should be coded inline where the comment is. Can be
>>>> found
>>>> in both API and IMPL.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: IMPLEMENT IMPL
>>>> Means the logic should be implemented in myfaces-impl while the api side
>>>> most likely throws an UnsupportedOperationException. Can be found in API
>>>> only.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: PLUGINIZE
>>>> Means the class might be generable by maven plugin, but adding the
>>>> metadta/code for it to work as yet to be done. This is mainly for the
>>>> new
>>>> enums for component attributes, the TODO is in the UIComponent class.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: VALIDATE
>>>> Means the code should be reviewed against the spec or the use case
>>>> should
>>>> be thought about to determine if the algorithm used is correct. Can be
>>>> found
>>>> in both API and IMPL.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: DEFINE
>>>> Means the spec is silent on the algorithm or the constant values. Found
>>>> in
>>>> API, currently only in ExceptionQueuedEventContext I think. I'll go to
>>>> the
>>>> EG with it.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: REPORT
>>>> Means that I must raise something I consider invalid as an issue to the
>>>> EG. Found in both API and IMPL.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: REFACTOR
>>>> Means the code should be moved to a more logical spot. Found in Facelets
>>>> mainly where I had to move some code around so that it would compile
>>>> with
>>>> the new API.
>>>>
>>>> // TODO: PROFILE
>>>> Means I think an alternative algorithm could be faster, but think more
>>>> thourough thinking should be put to it. Mostly found in Facelets and its
>>>> extensive use of Arrays.binarySearch instead of faster but more memory
>>>> consuming HashMap.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Help on any part is welcome, but what's left of error handling
>>>> (validating
>>>> where exceptions should be shallowed or rethrown and some missing
>>>> ErrorHandler code) and component tree visitiing was reserved for Google
>>>> SoC
>>>> I think so let not deal with those for now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> ~ Simon
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to