On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Werner Punz <[email protected]> wrote: > I vetoed following options: > > 2.) optimization options as attributes of f:ajax > 3.) optimization options within f:attributes nested in f:ajax > > The reason for this is, f: is a spec namespace which we cannot > alter!
we don't alter it. We just abuse a weakness in the spec (in facelets) > > So f:ajax and options within f:ajax is out of the question! > This simply would break spec behavior and probably would be > prohibited by the TCK anyway! I doubt that the TCK is able to check that > In the past we relied on the t: namespace for such behavior > and I personally thing we should follow the way for future extensions as > well! my only problem is that everybody has to use tomahawk for that. And I am totally -1 on that. Introducing some IMPL specific lib (-> mfx:ajax) does make much more sense, instead of putting things like that to tomahawk. If we can't agree on the f:ajax "hack", let's think about mfx:ajax... -M > > > Werner > ( > No I am not from the United Nations (although I would not mind to have a UN > salary ;-) > ) > > > > Ganesh schrieb: >> >> Hi, >> >> Vote was closed by 2009-04-27 09:55 a.m. Final results of the vote: >> [1] +3, 1 veto >> [2] +1, 3 vetoes >> [3] +0, 3 vetoes >> [4] +1, 0 vetoes >> >> Thus, no consensus has been reached by this vote. This is, what the >> decision making process on >> http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#decision-making prescribes: >> >> >>The rules require that a negative vote includes an alternative proposal >> or a detailed explanation of the reasons for the negative vote. The >> community then tries to gather consensus on an alternative proposal that >> resolves the issue. In the great majority of cases, the concerns leading to >> the negative vote can be addressed. >> This process is called "consensus gathering" and we consider it a very >> important indication of a healthy community.<< >> >> So, as everybody has given alternative proposals, all vetoers are asked to >> give detailed explanations for their negative votes to enable consensus >> gathering. My personal observation is that everybody was pretty fast with >> emitting vetoes making me feel I'm at the UNO security council :-) Imho and >> though I can't emit a binding vote solutions [1] to [3] all aren't that bad. >> Maybe everybody who emitted a veto could consider weakening it to a +0 thus >> opening the path for a majority decision? >> >> Best Regards, >> Ganesh >> >> Ganesh schrieb: >> > Hi, >> > >> > We are trying to agree on a way to include the optimization options >> pps:true/false, queuesize:n, errorlevel:WARNING/ERROR/NONE for JSF 2.0 >> Javascript with the MyFaces JSF 2.0 implementation. >> > We've got 4 different proposed solutions, each has been checked for >> technical feasability: >> > >> > 1.) extra options packed in a new t:ajax tag and myfaces.ajax.request >> > 2.) optimization options as attributes of f:ajax >> > 3.) optimization options within f:attributes nested in f:ajax >> > 4.) a separate taglibrary with a single tag mf:ajax included with the >> core >> > Please consider the solutions and vote! See previous mails on this list >> with "f:ajax and MyFaces extensions" in the subject for further details. >> > >> > Please note: >> > This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three +1 votes. This >> is a code modification vote [1], so you can veto a solution with a vote of >> -1. Please vote whole numbers. You can give a vote on each of the 4 >> solutions. E.g. you can vote: >> > >> > 1.) +1 >> > 2.) +1 >> > 3.) +0 >> > 4.) -1 >> > >> > The vote lasts for 72 hours. It start on 2009-04-24 9:55 a.m. and ends >> on 2009-04-27 09:55 a.m. >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------ >> > [ ] +1 - you favourize this solution >> > [ ] +0 - you don't like this solution >> > [ ] -1 - you veto this solution >> > >> > >> > Best Regards, >> > Ganesh Jung >> > >> > [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >> >> > > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
