Sorry for that, you are absolutely right, we should provide examples for doing this. It is just not easy to cope with all the work this project involves along with a full time day job, and this is probably why absolutely necessary things like this are left out.
I can promise you though that you will see much more work going on in the components part in the next time (especially after the refactoring in a separate subproject), and that we will hopefully find a better way to handle situations like this. regards, Martin On 6/22/05, Balaji Saranathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tx . > > Bang on the target. That's what I'm going through....I really want to > use the tree2 of Myfaces, however, I need to tell if they would run on > SUN RI (just in case) else, I have to go and develop it myself. But I > hardly have a day to say if it would work or not :-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: CONNER, BRENDAN (SBCSI) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 11:25 AM > To: MyFaces Discussion; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Compatibility with SUN RI > > > Just a comment on that: To gain wider adoption of the components, it > would be preferable to have a complete set of examples included with the > distribution that are independent of the JSF implementation chosen > (i.e., that have been tested on at least one implementation other than > MyFaces). After all, that's the whole idea behind Java and J2EE. ;-) > > It's not just a minor point, either. Some people have just one or two > weeks to evaluate the different alternatives for use at their respective > organizations, and not all organizations want to use the MyFaces JSF > implementation. If they can't get up and running fairly quickly on at > least a demo project, they are more likely to look elsewhere or develope > their own, thus weakening or slowing down the MyFaces project as a > whole. > > - Brendan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Marinschek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 10:11 AM > To: MyFaces Discussion; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Compatibility with SUN RI > > > first: you need to replace myfaces-jsf-api.jar and the > myfaces-jsf-impl.jar to get rid of the MyFaces implementation. > > If that does not run, either, here what I think: > > Even though many (not all) of the custom components work with the RI, I > would doubt that the whole example application works with the RI... > there are many hooks used in the examples which depend on the > implementation, afaik. > > I would say you should try to setup your own examples. > > regards, > > Martin > > On 6/22/05, Balaji Saranathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > For certain reasons, I have to show that the using myfaces components > is > > compatible with the SUN JSF RI, though we might go ahead and use > Myfaces > > completely. I tried replacing the myfaces-jsf-api.jar with Sun's > > implementation in the myfaces-examples application. However, I get > only a > > blank screen, no error messages too. I removed the commons-el.jar and > jsp2.0 > > jar from the WEB-INF/lib directory. Can any one throw some light on > the > > same? > > > > Your help is appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > Balaji > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice > > > > The information contained in this electronic message and any > attachments to > > this message are intended > > for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain > confidential or > > privileged information. If > > you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at Wipro > or > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately > > and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. > > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice > > The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to > this message are intended > for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or > privileged information. If > you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at Wipro or > [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately > and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. > >
