Simon, any help would be great! On 8/1/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ouch,Yeah, I would be interested. It's quite critical to give users an alternative over RI. Regards, Simon Lessard Fujitsu Consulting "Matthias Wessendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-01 16:41 Please respond to adffaces-dev To: adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org cc: Subject: Re: Trinidad and JSF 1.2 Simon, side question; are you interested in helping on the jsf 1.2 task? I am not speaking about Trinidad, I am speaking about MyFaces. There is currently no development going on on this road. Last commits where in June from Dennis and me; that's it. -Matthias On 8/1/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > Was there any decision made concerning JSF 1.2 and Trinidad? The spec is > compatible, however generics were added to the API so some Trinidad > classes will requires some changes, the components mainly. What is the > master plan concerning it? Stay with 1.1 as long as possible? Switch to > 1.2 as soon as MyFaces is stable with the new spec? > > Personally I would like to switch to 1.2 as soon as there's a stable spec > implementation, especially since Trinidad is still in incubation (thus > don't have that many users) and 1.2 is the standard for JEE 5. At worst, > those wanting 1.1 can use the old ADF Faces. > > So far, the main compatibility issues I found are with > ExternalContext.getApplicationMap, ExternalContext.getRequestMap, > ExternalContext.getSessionMap and UIComponent.getAttributes. Trinidad uses > an <Object, Object> semantic for all of those. However, JSF 1.2 forces > <String, Object> for all of those. > > > Regards, > > Simon Lessard > Fujitsu Consulting > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
-- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
