On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Deluan Quintão <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, it already works with both 1.0.x and 1.1.x. So following your > rationale, do you think it's a good idea to release it as a independent > project (independent source and maven repos) while it's not officially > adopt/endorsed by Shiro project?
Obviously you could release it completely independently and/or do whatever you like with it, but no, I was only suggesting that it would not be part of the Shiro's core build. The only practical implication is that it has a separate version number from Shiro core libs. We would still take it and maintain it - since we have a jsp tag library, I don't see a problem with jsf as well. Kalle > On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Kalle Korhonen > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I'd expect the same jsf module would work both with 1.0.x and 1.1.x >> Shiro - there were no drastic interface changes. Furthermore, I've >> been proposing that the support libraries would become independently >> releasable modules and so we could release the jsf module alone after >> 1.1.0 Shiro. >> >> Kalle >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Deluan Quintão <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I've already submitted the patch to JIRA containing the shiro-faces >> module, >> > but I see you guys are very busy with the 1.1 release. I'm using the >> faces >> > module in one of my projects and making changes to it's code, so I >> published >> > it in a public repository as an independent module/library. >> > >> > So, in order to not leave an older version of the module attached to >> JIRA, >> > I'd like to hear your opinions of whether it's better to remove the patch >> > from there and add a comment pointing to the source repo I'm using right >> > now. Then, when you have a chance to look at it, you let me know and I >> > prepare an updated patch and attach again to the JIRA ticket. >> > >> > What do you think? >> > >> > Deluan >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Deluan Quintão <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> As I only have the JSF 1.2/Facelets module working and tested, I'll >> focus >> >> on this for now, and when it's done I'll try to port it to JSF 2. >> >> >> >> I'll create a shiro-faces module under 'support', and >> >> use org.apache.shiro.web.faces as package. >> >> >> >> Deluan >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Kalle Korhonen < >> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Two modules sounds right. They *could* have the same name, or >> >>> artifactid, and reserve the first two version numbers to denote the >> >>> compatible jsf version, e.g. 1.1.x and 2.0.x. I can see these being >> >>> yet other independently releasable modules... (related to the other >> >>> thread). >> >>> >> >>> Kalle >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:29 AM, Deluan Quintão <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > Hi All, >> >>> > >> >>> > I have a issue regarding JSF/Facelets versions and would like to hear >> >>> your >> >>> > opinion. >> >>> > >> >>> > The tags I develop were meant to be used with JSF 1.2/Facelets >> 1.1.14. >> >>> > >> >>> > I don't use JSF 2.0 in my company yet, but taking a quick look on it, >> I >> >>> saw >> >>> > that Facelets were integrated in the 2.0 and the packages for it have >> >>> > changed! >> >>> > >> >>> > How do I go about it? Two libs, shiro-facelets (for JSF 1.1/Facelets) >> >>> and >> >>> > shiro-jsf (for JSF 2.0) ? >> >>> > >> >>> > What do you think? >> >>> > >> >>> > Thanks, >> >>> > Deluan. >> >>> > >> >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >>> > From: Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >> >>> > Date: Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:50 PM >> >>> > Subject: Re: Shiro tags not working in Icefaces page. >> >>> > To: Deluan Quintão <[email protected]> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > Hi Deluan, >> >>> > >> >>> > Sounds good! >> >>> > >> >>> > I have one quick request: could you please send further emails to >> the >> >>> > [email protected] list? All development-related discussion >> should >> >>> > be out in the open with the community so everyone benefits from the >> >>> > discussion, not just me ;). I didn't CC the dev list in case you >> >>> > needed to keep this communication private for some reason, but if >> not, >> >>> > can you please use the dev list from now on? Thanks! >> >>> > >> >>> > As for the source/Maven organization: >> >>> > >> >>> > If the classes you're using are in JDK 5 without needing any 3rd >> party >> >>> > dependency, your classes can go directly in the 'web' module. If >> they >> >>> > can, then the starting package should be org.apache.shiro.web.faces >> to >> >>> > be congruent with the other similar web support packages that exist >> >>> > (e.g. org.apache.shiro.web.servlet, org.apache.shiro.web.tags, etc). >> >>> > >> >>> > If your code requires a 3rd party library, the base code >> >>> > (JDK5-compliant) should go in the 'web' module as noted above, and >> any >> >>> > 3rd-party implementation-specific code would go into a new 'support' >> >>> > module, i.e. <project root>/support/myfaces (or similar, depending on >> >>> > the library). >> >>> > >> >>> > As for mercurial/git, Apache only uses subversion, so we use that. >> >>> > The best way to share code with us is check out the code from >> >>> > subversion (trunk), make edits there, and upload patches to Jira. >> >>> > >> >>> > Cheers, >> >>> > >> >>> > Les >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >
