>From: samju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > So Mr. Kito, need a answer. Wich kind of things have changed? Why is it so > quiet around Shale? What is the Problem with Shale? does Shale still a > modern web application framework? > > PL please give a declaration. >
I see two issues here. The first is that the shale volunteers have been distracted with life events. I personally have been consumed with a new job trying to catch up on two years of product development and have not made time to participate. The second issue is that JSF is starting to mature. The third JSF specification is in the works. Some of the Shale ideas will make their way into the JSF 2 specification others could also "standardize" by merging two similar implementations. I would be supportive of a merger with Myfaces for these two reasons. > Sam > Gary > > kito99 wrote: > > > > So, here's a question. I know originally some people on the MyFaces team > > thought that Shale should be part of MyFaces. At the time, I know Craig > > wasn't interested. However, things have changed, and I think Shale could > > really benefit from the MyFaces community, especially since they are now > > starting to duplicate some of Shale's functionality (i.e. Orchestra's View > > Controller). > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, > > training, and mentoring > > http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces > > FAQ, news, and info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/MyFaces-tf4643427.html#a13295601 > Sent from the Shale - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
