oki, great. Let's get rid of it. It just makes it harder to read the code and do maintenance.
I gonna creat a JIRA for it and remove it. LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]> > To: MyFaces Development <[email protected]>; Mark Struberg > <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:29 PM > Subject: Re: JspStateManagerImpl vs StateManagerImpl > > Hi > > 2012/11/15 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: >> We have 2 StateManager implementations. Guess the following classes can now > get deleted? >> >> * JspStateManagerImpl >> >> * MyfacesStateManager >> >> or alternate question: the HtmlResponseStateManager extends > MyfacesResponseStateManager. >> If we keep that pattern, why does the StateManagerImpl which seems to be > the 'new' one doesn't extend MyFacesStateManager? >> > > MyfacesResponseStateManager is a leftover from jsf 1.1.x. In that > time, the idea was to store the state using javascript but right now > that class does nothing. Remove that code is a valid option. > >> Either keep both or delete both. >> Btw: such classes _always_ need to get annotated with @Deprecated + JavaDoc > or even better they should get immediately deleted. >> > > I would vote for delete them, because that part was not fully done, so > it has never worked. > >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >
