On 5/19/07, Karl von Randow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On 5/18/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > I like the idea of lumping the various pieces we want to keep into >> a single >> > jar, a la JSTL. One thing, though: Wouldn't we want to ensure that >> all of >> > the pieces in that jar are EL-enabled? Have some enabled and some >> not would >> > be funky, to say the least. (But then we could be in good shape >> here and I >> > just don't know it.) >> >> Absolutely. I'm thinking more that we would refactor things utterly >> and assume 2.4/2.0. That makes the EL stuff easier doesn't it? >> > Yes, and I've been a 2.0 proponent for a while, where we can (even tag > files etc.). I actually still have some cause to build applications pre 2.0 so I'd like to retain pre-support if possible... cf. I get a bit frustrated by Java projects that are compiled 1.5 when they could be compiled pre-1.5 compatible.
<snip/> I think that adds another axis of complexity (since at some point we'll want to have a 2.0 worthy release to stay reasonably current). However, if there are still volunteers for a pre 2.0 distro, so be it. -Rahul
Isn't every tag library EL-enabled in 2.0 as long as it has rtexpr allowed? By EL-enabled do you mean similar to the EL / RT flavour tab libraries that JSTL has (had?)? I would be in favour of that approach, except perhaps it isn't necessary if most people are going to be 2.0+ and no need it, and those of us still deploying pre-2.0 never had EL support in the tag libaries anyway... cheers, Karl
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
