No. I think new components will finally end up in tomahawk, cause this
might be the name for our central component repository.

I think a myfaces-all.jar will also contain the sandbox components -
why would they not be in there? it is just necessary to clearly mark
them as sandbox (e.g. using a new taglib, as was proposed by Sean) so
that the users know what they get.

regards,

Martin

On 5/27/05, Grant Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  Sounds reasonable. However, just to be clear... Will new components start
> off in the sandbox, then get promoted to tomahawk, and then finally to
> myfaces ? I guess I don't understand the need for the intermediate step.
>  
>  +1 for myfaces-all.jar, although I don't think it should contain sandbox
> components (which is I think what everyone else is saying).
>  
>  You mentioned SVN changes / reorg. Would that be a new repository ? If so,
> do we need to request that from the infrastructure people, or can we do it
> ourselves ?
>  
>  
>  Sean Schofield wrote: 
>  Actually I forgot to mention my idea for sandbox. I think we should
> have a separate jar file for the sandbox (myfaces-sandbox.jar) It
> would have the necessary share code + sandbox specifcic TLD + its own
> javadoc.
> 
> My thinking is that we have a sandbox bundle but that we never
> formally release it (since its just a sandbox.) So you can build from
> source or get a nightly sandbox-05272005.tar.gz.
> 
> So us MyFaces developers who use MyFaces implementation (instead of
> RI) would have two jar files in our path: myfaces-all.jar and
> myfaces-sandbox.jar
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> sean
> 
> On 5/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  
>  
>  +1 on myfaces-all.jar too.
>  
>  Maybe it should include the future sandbox's files too.
>  So maybe a myfaces.jar, same as we have today, and a myfaces-all.jar that
> will also includes the sandbox files.
>  
>  Sylvain.
> 
>  
>  
>  On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:32 +0200, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: 
>  +1 on myfaces-all.jar
> ;)
> 
> On 5/27/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  
>  
>  I agree with Martin that the jar with all the stuff is very useful, at
>  
>  least
>  
>  
>  for me that I update the jar very often. With only one jar I can discard
> that I have done a mistake deploying the jars when an exception or error
>  
>  is
>  
>  
>  thrown. My 2 euro cents...
> 
> Bruno
> 
> 2005/5/27, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>  
>  
>  I would still supply a catch-it-all you get it all jar file.
> 
> It's just so much easier, and there are many frameworks supplying
> something like that.
> 
> To avoid confusion, we should name it:
> 
> myfaces-all.jar 
> 
> though, I think!
> 
> regards,
> 
> Martin
> 
> On 5/27/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  
>  
>  
>  Can someone please elaborate on what the "shared" code contains and 
> why it is in "quotes"? :-)
>  
>  This refers to the code currently in the trunk under src/share. It
> refers to code that is used in both the implentation as well as the
> custom components. 
> 
>  
>  
>  John Fallows.
>  
>  sean
> 
>  
>  
>  
> 
>  
>  .
> 
>  
>  
>

Reply via email to