Although I don't know how the Trinidad code generation works in detail, I think we should give it a try to generate the components for the HTML Basic renderkit...
Bruno On 10/25/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Trinidad has maven2 plugins for that. the cool thing is it uses templates, which are valid java files. so, if you like you can add a param. to use "standard" jsf templates instead of the trinidad templates, which are using FacesBean for instance. -M On 10/25/06, Dennis Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > Generic code across both the implementation and tomahawk belong in shared/core. The shared package is then morphed into shared_core and shared_tomahawk at build time. I don't see any hard and fast rule for what is generic - use your discretion. > > Team, wasn't there talk a ways back about generating the tags for the 1.2 implementation? I remember someone talking about leveraging some work over in Trinidad for this. Please speak up on this issue in order to prevent a possible large duplication of effort. > > Dennis Byrne > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Andreas Berger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 05:36 PM > >To: dev@myfaces.apache.org > >Subject: right content of shared/core > > > >Hello, > > > >I'm currently implementing the Core-Tags for JSR-252. Is there a rule, > >where to put the generic classes? > > > >For some Tags I created generic classes [1],[2] and put them in the > >myfaces-impl jar. But now I've seen that e.g. the > >ConvertDateTimeTagBase is stored in shared/core. So I guess, that all > >generic classes should be stored in shared/core, am I right? And is > >there a namespace for generic classes? > > > >cheers, > >Andreas > > > > > >[1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1474 > >[2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1475 > > > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
