On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:11:00 -0500, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Pugh wrote: > > I'd guess that the JSF jar's are not distributable on IBiblio, > > just like the JavaMail ones? > > Check the license, but if it is the SBCL, then the restriction applies. > This would be a good reason to use MyFaces, of course. :-) > > Martin Cooper wrote: > > > One alternative, I suppose, might be to get the MyFaces jars up on > > ibiblio and build against that instead. The lesser of two evils? > > Excuse me? Why did MyFaces become any evil at all?
Sorry, I didn't mean that MyFaces is evil per se. ;-) The options appear to be: 1) Change the build to compile against a copy of the JSF RI that has been downloaded "out of band". Not sure how we do this in a way that the path used works for everyone. 2) Change the build to compile against MyFaces instead of the RI. The only problems I can see with this is are (a) it might be less than obvious to some people (who don't care about Chain and JSF) what MyFaces is and why it's needed; and (b) MyFaces, as I understand it, is an extension of the JSF JSR, so conceivably, Chain could end up depending on extensions if we're not compiling against the RI. (I honestly don't know how real that scenario is.) Neither of these is ideal, which is what led me to use the phrase "the lesser of two evils". ;-) -- Martin Cooper > --- Noe > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
