volosied opened a new pull request #120:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/120


   
   -     We must probably also add the new namespaces to FacesConfigurator.java
             - The only namespaces I saw were for  http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf, 
http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsp, and http://xmlns.jcp.org/jstl. I don't are updated in 
EE9, but will in EE10. See https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/faces-api/issues/1526
   
   
   -     add 3.0 in faces-config-versionType in web-facesconfig_3_0.xsd
             - Updated to 3.0 
   
   -     we often has stuff like public final static String NAMESPACE = 
"http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsp/jstl/functions";;
             -Same as first point 
   
   
   ______________
   Other items I noticed... 
   
   Questions:  Is _impl/src/main/conf/META-INF/standard-faces-config-base.xml_ 
update necessary? I believe since this is a new namespace? But 2.3, and 2.2 
still reference 2.0 in the other branches. 
   
   
   
   Should this be updated to 3.0? Or should we leave it as 2.3? 
   ```
   
/Users/siedlecki/open-source/apache/api/src/main/java/jakarta/faces/annotation/FacesConfig.java
   Version.JSF_2_3;
   ```
   
   We should simplify the version checks, and handle for 3.0 as well. 
   ```
   main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/DefaultFacesConfigurationProvider.java
   496:            || "2.2".equals(version) || "2.3".equals(version))
   ```
   
   I believe the version handing should be improved for 30 as 
isVersion23OrLater does not seem appropriate. 
   ```
   main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/ConfigFilesXmlValidationUtils.java
   236:                            : ("2.3".equals(version) ? 
FACES_CONFIG_SCHEMA_PATH_23
   289:            result = handler.isVersion23OrLater() ? "2.3" : 
(handler.isVersion22() ? "2.2" :
   ```
   
   


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


Reply via email to