On 6/7/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, Jacob asked me if I'd like to join up. If I'd join, then as an individual.
Why not as the official ASF representative for JSF.next? Of course there should be an official vote, but from my POV there speaks nothing against you joining as a representative. And I have the feeling that others think similarly. ;-)
I have some very specific ideas about JSF 2.0, though.
On more good reason for you becoming the official ASF/JSF.next guy ;-) Manfred
regards, Martin On 6/7/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > tracking system), but there hasn't been a formal roadmap for JSF.next > > > > so is JSF.next the project name for it? > > > > No, "JSF.next" is shorthand for "whatever version follows JSF 1.2 . Without a formal roadmap, there's no guarantee that the next version will actually be 2.0 (although that seems most likely to me). But the real roadmap could, for example, contemplate an intermediate 1.3 version with more incremental changes before a next major version. > > As a historical note, the JSP version in J2EE 1.3 was numbered 1.2. The original JSR for JCP to be included in J2EE 1.4 was proposed as 1.3, but the scope of the changes that the EG took on was so large that it became obvious that "JSP 2.0" was a much better identifier. So, to avoid confusion, within Sun we've started talking about "xxx.next" as being the next version of "xxx", leaving the precise identiier to be determined later. > > > > > > that happens, it would be very much appropriate that Apache have a > > > representative on the EG, and it would seem to make the most sense that this > > > rep be someone from the MyFaces community. > > > > Manfred is already there. I think Martin is interested too. > > > > Cool. However, we'll want to figure out which particular person to nominate as the official Apache representative ... in general, JCP expert groups have only one representative from a particular organization (but that person can generally communicate to others within the organization to build consensus, and then represent the organization's view back to the EG). It's also possible for additional folks to become EG members as individuals, at the discretion of the spec lead(s). > > > > -Matthias > > > > Craig > > > > > > > In the interim before the formal announcement, talk to Ed Burns and Roger > > > Kitain, who were the co-spec leads for 1.2 (and AFAIK that's not changing > > > for future versions, but I'm not as intimately connected with the specs > > > world in my Creator architect role -- instead, I'm a customer :-) about the > > > kinds of areas you would like to see a 2.0 spec cover. > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > [1] > > > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176 > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Craig McClanahan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > CONVERTER_ID = "javax.faces.DoubleTime " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looks like a spec bug due to a cut-n-paste error in the RI's API > > > classes. > > > > > If so, the correct thing to do would be to report feedback via the > > > website > > > > > on the spec cover ( > > > > > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net ) so > > > that > > > > > it can get addressed as an errata, or included in a maintenance version > > > of > > > > > the 1.2 spec. > > > > > > > > > > Until then, though, I'd recommend you keep it ... this is the kind of > > > > > mechanical detail that the API signature tests in the TCK will likely > > > flag > > > > > if it's missing. > > > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Any reason for keeping [1] ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://tinyurl.com/gjdxe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > Ah, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks. Some are some issues also the reasons, why UIComponent is > > > not > > > > > > > > an interface? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Adam Winer < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Backwards compatibility - at least of a sort; you won't get > > > > > > > > > AbstractMethodErrors when using 1.1-compiled subclasses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does anybody know why the methods added to ViewHandler or > > > > > > > > > > ExternalContext in 1.2 are not abstract, like their *old* JSF > > > 1.1 > > > > > > > > > > counterparts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > Aechterhoek 18 > > > > 48282 Emsdetten > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > Aechterhoek 18 > > 48282 Emsdetten > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > >
