I strongly recommend using the following artifact instead of javax.el:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
<artifactId>geronimo-el_2.2_spec</artifactId>
<version>1.0</version>
</dependency>
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Fri, 10/1/10, Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [core] FacesEL vs. UEL vs. UEL 2.2
To: "MyFaces Development" <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 1:54 AM
Hi
2010/9/30 Martin Koci <[email protected]>
Hi,
there is a disorder in Expression Lauguage names in myfaces core.
Currently myfaces (method
javax.faces.validator._ExternalSpecifications.isUnifiedELAvailable() for
example) output a log:
"MyFaces Unified EL support enabled"
But this is a little misleading: there should be "Unified EL 2.2 support
enabled" because it tests presence of EL 2.2. "Unified EL support
enabled" does not make sence at all because JSF use Unified EL as core
technology and that cannot be disabled.
There are three major versions of ELs:
1) javax.faces.el - old and depreceated
2) javax.el 2.0, 2.1 (from JSP 2.0, 2.1)
Isn't javax.el version 1.0 on maven repo?
3) javax.el 2.2 from JSP 2.2, part of Java EE 6, EL with method
invocations
Suggestions:
Rename isUnifiedELAvailable to isUnifiedEL22Available,
TagValueExpressionUEL to TagValueExpressionUEL22 and so on.
For EL 2.3 (not released yet) we can add similar methods/classes.
Change log to "MyFaces Unified EL 2.2 support enabled (method
invocations are available)".
I'll add similiar log "MyFaces Faces EL (javax.faces.el) support
disabled" as part of "disabling "old" technologies"
WDYT ?
Sounds reasonable for me. The message about MyFaces Faces EL
really is not necessary at all in my personal opinion, but if it is added
no problem.
regards,
Leonardo
Kočičák
