Right. I just noticed I said Trinidad 1.2. I meant 2.0. ;) I been pretty sick the past couple of days so thanks for the correction Andrew..
On Feb 27, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Andrew Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: > I would suggest trying out the 2.0 in a branch of your source code and > testing it out. At the very least this will give you an idea what is better, > or what still needs some work. We have been fixing bugs quite quickly in > Trinidad 2, and it receives more attention than 1.2, but if people aren't > reporting bugs, it will take much longer for it to stabilize. > > -Andrew > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hmm. Tough call. All I can really say is that great pains have been >> taken in Trinidad 1.2 to make sure things are backward compatible. >> Certainly by remaining active in the project, you can ensure that your >> stuff does not require to total rewrite. >> >> That said, the Trinidad trunk is currently undergoing many bug fixes >> and enhancements so I would expect things to be stabilized soon. >> >> Scott >> >> On Feb 25, 2011, at 7:06 AM, Me Self <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Im starting a new JSF project and must decide whether to go with a >>> stabile 1.2 impl or if I should risk it and use 2.0 beta. Im >>> considering 2.0 because the app will be used by powerusers - they need >>> all the clientside javascript speedups I can provide. So I would like >>> to hear your opinions - will it be too much trouble going with the >>> beta now (project deadline is in august)? Do I risk that features that >>> were working in 1.2 are broken in 2.0 beta? >>
