Hi John,
On Nov 1, 2005, at 10:25 PM, John Fallows wrote:
If you want to use a version of tomahawk that is incompatible with
your MyFaces implementation on the web server, just upgrade the
MyFaces version. Yes its a pain but it certainly doesn't seem to be
insurmountable.
This just proves that we depend on something other than the APIs in
the specification to integrate the two projects together. That
indicates that we haven't ensured proper isolation between the
projects.
Am I misssing something here? Is the problem more significant then
upgrading your MyFaces implementation?
I think you might be missing the point of having a standard. :-)
The implementation of the standard runtime stands alone. The
implementation of any extensions to the standard also stand alone.
The current shared code approach breaks the guarantee that any
combination of standard runtime implementation and standard
extension implementation can work together.
The fact that a certain combination of these implementations are
provided by a common set of developers should be entirely
irrelevant to the end user.
I think you might be missing something here. The standard does not
provide sufficient definition of how the components will be
implemented (and perhaps that is a good thing). There is a ton of
common code between all components that is not defined in the
standard. We can choose to re-implement that functionality in
tomahawk, copy and repackage or put it in a separate jar. Perhaps it
would be better to have more detail in the API for the component
classes and perhaps it would not be, either way the 1.1 and 1.2
versions of the spec don't have the detail needed to reuse complex
code across components. With the current spec its better IMO to
implement everything once and share it.
I think the bottom line is that myfaces-share.jar is something like
commons-logging.jar. No one decries the fact that we depend on
logging (well perhaps 'no one' is a strong statement :-) so why
should we be put out by dependence on myfaces-share.jar. It could
just as easily be called html-utils.jar or jsf-component-building-
made-easy.jar or whatever.
As far as separation of the projects goes. myfaces-impl.jar and
tomahawk.jar depend on myfaces-share.jar. myfaces-share.jar should
not depend on myfaces-impl.jar of course but could depend on myfaces-
api.jar. The last time I checked the dependency tree was as described
here so I think we are in good shape to make things look like this.
Anyway my $0.02 on this.
TTFN,
-bd-
