My intention is not to break something, and I was ONLY talking about the JSF-2 version of Trinidad. If there is code which just makes no sense at all in JSF-2, then we should in MY opinion kill this code. If it doesn't make sense for Trinidad, then it is highly likely that it also don't make sense for ADF anymore, right?
IF some parts are still needed by some known 3rd party libs, then those parts can of course remain. But at the end of the day maintaining Trinidad will become more and more problematic if we don't get rid of long time obsolete stuff. Again: only my personal opinion and experience. I assume that ADF also has a JSF-1 and a separate JSF-2 branch. All the JSF-1 stuff would of course remain the way it is currently! LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Scott O'Bryan <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 2:20 PM > Subject: Re: [trinidad] cleanup > > We could, yes. But we would force people to migrate apps which, perhaps > is not a bad thing but traditionally we've taken a full vote before > changing/removing API's in Trinidad because, doing so, incurs additional > cost on the other frameworks which are using Trinidad as a foundation. > > Any company which provides Trinidad as a foundation for other framework > code (like Oracle's ADFFaces) benefits from NOT breaking users of the > framework every release and, frankly, I see a lot of value in keeping > them around 'if possible'. > > Like I say, I'm not opposed to it, but I suppose I take more of a Java > ZEN approach to deprecation of API's. > > Scott > > On 10/05/2011 05:41 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >> I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. >> >> Trinidad-2 is for JSF-2 upwards exclusively, isn't? >> >> If so, then we can easily get rid of all the old dust which just confuses > people. >> >> Furthermore there seems to be a few compat problems with JSF-2 f:ajax which > can only be resolved by carefully cleaning those areas up. >> Just leave behind the old stuff. >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Scott O'Bryan<[email protected]> >>> To: MyFaces Development<[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 1:06 PM >>> Subject: Re: [trinidad] cleanup >>> >>> >>> Well just because something is depth aged doesn't mean we can > remove it. It just means that an alternate means is suggested or something > may > not work exactly as expected if used. >>> >>> >>> A Prime example is ExternalContextUtils. That guy has been around > since JSF 1.1. It contains lots of functionality that wasn't present in > later versions of JSF, but now is. Use of the native objects should be > encouraged, but there is also something to be said about older code being > able > to migrate easier to a later release. >>> >>> >>> Now I DO agree with removing the JSDoc and possibly the deprecations in > the impl, but I think it's important to keep any deprecations in the API for > backward compatibility. >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 4:32 AM, Gerhard > Petracek<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> both - there are just two possibilities: those parts are really > deprecated and we remove them (and refactor the rest) or we can't remove > them and the information (annotation and/or javadoc) isn't correct. >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> gerhard >>>> http://www.irian.at >>>> >>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>> Courses in English and German >>>> >>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2011/10/5 Scott O'Bryan<[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Gerhard, by deprivation hints, I'm assuming you mean the > javadoc deprecations and not the annotations, right? >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 3:09 AM, Gerhard > Petracek<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> hi @ all, >>>>>> >>>>>> there are still over 400 deprecations (via @Deprecated) and > nearly 400 via javadoc (not all of them overlap). >>>>>> a lot of them are in for a long time and some of them were > deprecated even before [1]. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> however, some parts are still used and can't be > removed. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> imo we should do a cleanup or remove the deprecation hints. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, >>>>>> gerhard >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1229 >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.irian.at >>>>>> >>>>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>>>> Courses in English and German >>>>>> >>>>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>>>> >>> >
