Mixing tomahawk and trinidad is a very bad idea in my eyes!
All projects that use a4j or other ajax enabled component frameworks are
not compatible to Trinidad (or each other).

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Matthias Wessendorf
Sent: Donnerstag, 29. November 2007 12:24
To: MyFaces Discussion
Subject: Re: Future Focus Question: Tomahawk or Trinidad

> Take an example: most people would agree facelets is good idea. The
> Jsf 1.2 spec is out since May 11, 2006. We're 1,5 yr(one and a half
> year!) further down the line but there is no working combination for
> MF1.2 + Facelets + Tomahawk 2.0 (the latter, I've been told, is in
> line with the MF 1.2 release , and indeed, I've had worse problems
> using Toma 116 or 117 + MF1.2 + Facelets)
> 1,5 year. For those disagreeing: check this mailing list or the posted
> bugs: they're about basic stuff not working.

myfaces 1.2 works.
myfaces 1.2.1 will be out soon, and contains tons of fixes/enhancements
there is no tomahawk 2.0 (not really)

Again, I am still thinking, that JSF 1.2 isn't really needed.
When JSF2 comes out, there will be much much more value on the table.

>
> Frankly I'm cornered with bugs for this combination to the extend I
> will have to downgrade again to MF1.1. For a new project that I
> started half a yr ago. This is sad.

not sure why using myfaces 1.1.x is bad.

>
> I like Matthias's idea of a common base best. I hope the Toma/Trini
> shells on top of it can be made very thin on the sort term (would be
> very OO-spirited as well).

actually, this discussion is old.
(one) goal is having a *common* lib,
that can be used (in first place) w/ all Trin/tom/tob.

> On the mid/long: this would allow to diverge between stable and
> development components, kinda like Tomahawk and Sandbox now.
> But of the stable components, I am convinced the best approach is to
> have them all at verybody's disposal with just one prefix (it even
> sounds obvious no? Or am I the only one).

hrm, not really one 100% sure, that a "super" lib is a good thing (tm)

-Matthias

>
> --Wolf
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org

Reply via email to