Hehe The Faces of MyFaces, focusing the community, the pillar of the
project, is a good idea. No problems for me :-)
Cheers,
Bruno
On 27/04/07, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi *,
we (Manfred and me, but get in contact with us if you are at J1, we'll
share the stage!) have been
Yes, as Mike and Adam, I think it is better to have one mailing list.
It helps to the community convergence,
Cheers,
Bruno
On 27/04/07, Adam Winer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also reluctant to spin us off into a separate e-mail list.
I do think we'll want a [Trinidad] convention for posts
[X] graduate as a subproject of the Apache MyFaces community
[ ] graduate as a TLP
[ ] not ready to graduate, because...
On 12/04/07, Grant Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[X] graduate as a subproject of the Apache MyFaces community
[ ] graduate as a TLP
[ ] not ready to graduate, because...
On
[X] +1 (Binding) for PPMC members only
[ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released,
and why..
On 09/03/07, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[X] +1 (Binding) for PPMC members
IMO I prefer to use as much as I can the code autogenerated without
having to add new code to the methods (delegating all this to the code
generator). This eases the process of migrating code. Adding very
specific code to methods might break future migrations (e.g. migrating
tomahawk components
[X] +1 (Binding) for PPMC members only
On 12/01/07, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[X] +1 (Binding) for PPMC members only
[ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause
Maybe you only had switched the root dir or a few dirs of the whole
structure, and when you commit outside these you commit to the trunk
(you could check with 'svn info' for that dir'). I normally do as
Matthias though, checking out in a clean place and working there...
Cheers,
Bruno
On
/adffaces/branches/faces-1_2-061113
Sorry about the confusion... could you merge into that branch? I should
really rename the old faces-1_2 branch to something less tempting.
-- Adam
On 11/27/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I have just merged the development in that branch
Thanks Adam. There is one patch by Andreas Berger that remains to be
applied to the branch. After that, hopefully today, I will test that
trinidad builds well with the branched version and then I will try to
merge it with the current faces 1.2 branch. I agree with you that we
have to avoid a huge
/adffaces/branches/myfaces-1_2-maven-faces-plugin
could be removed now and it shouldn't be used for further development.
Cheers!
Bruno
On 27/11/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Adam. There is one patch by Andreas Berger that remains to be
applied to the branch. After
Hi,
Well, I have merged the plugin with the branch we were adapting the
autogeneration for myfaces and the tests I have done before the commit
were with the wrong version of the plugin (the existing one) and not
the new one. I am fixing this... bear with me ;-)
Bruno
Basically the components are being generated with the myfaces
generator, fixing this...
Bruno
On 27/11/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Well, I have merged the plugin with the branch we were adapting the
autogeneration for myfaces and the tests I have done before the commit
were
(well, I mean a working way) to
implement it?
public boolean isTrinidadComponent()
{
return (_TRINIDAD_COMPONENT_BASE.equals(findComponentSuperclass()));
}
Cheers,
Bruno
On 27/11/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basically the components are being generated with the myfaces
On 10/29/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Adam. I am refactoring the plugin so it can be extended easily.
Instead of putting if statements over and over again in the mojo (I
have started with that), I have decided to create a ComponentGenerator
this plugin can help to reuse the same base classes for tomahawk
and trinidad in the future,
Cheers,
Bruno
On 10/29/06, Adam Winer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cool! (Glanced at what you're coding on that branch so far, looks
excellent.)
-- Adam
On 10/28/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I
Ah, and I forgot:
d. Do not generate the protected constructor that accepts the
renderType as a parameter
Cheers,
Bruno
On 10/28/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I have been playing with the maven-faces-plugin from the 1.2
branch to adapt it to generate the components
.
Validators/Converters are not generated, but the plugins register
them in faces-config.xml file
do you have something working?
Why not creating a branch in Trinidad for that ?
I mean, you are a committer ;)
On 10/28/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, and I forgot:
d. Do not generate
. But it's
ignored at runtime, and not in our JAR - only the
merged UIXCommand is.
On 10/8/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That sounds really interesting. As you may know, we are working quite
actively in the implementation of MyFaces 1.2. Now I am migrating the
JSF core tags, but we
Mmh, after a few more seconds of personal deliberation. I think that
Trinidad is more appropiate...
So I want to revert my previous vote and my new vote goes for
+1 Trinidad
Sorry,
Bruno
On 6/8/06, Bruno Aranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mmh, not very convinced by the names.
Trinidad
19 matches
Mail list logo
