I would like two different TLPs: 1. MyFaces Implementation (keeps progressing with the specification's maturity).
2. JSF Component Libraries (whatever their names will be in the future) which work with Sun & MyFaces Implementations. Not one. But both. If they only work with MyFaces then there is no need for another TLP. Just like Tomahawk components need to adhere to certain requirements prior to coming out of the sandbox - a "promotion criteria" should be developed for components under this TLP. I think it will allow the developer community to channel their open source energies better and lead to more commits. Cheers, Zubin. On 3/16/07, Barbalace, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As someone who mostly just lurks on the dev list, I did want to comment on Werner's post. I would be very interested in component programming, and I have a fair number of ideas for what I think would make useful and interesting components. (Wouldn't it be nice to have a Google Maps component, for instance?) But trying to figure out even how to get started is frustrating. There are all these different projects, with seemingly different purposes, with scattered or poor documentation, and with no single place for getting a top-down overview. Having a nice, clear taxonomy of all the projects and their relationships would be a helpful start, but it would be so much better if there were better integration. I personally would be unlikely to start developing components until that is achieved. Richard J. Barbalace > -----Original Message----- > From: Werner Punz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:48 AM > To: dev@myfaces.apache.org > Subject: Re: Trinidad, Tomahawk, Tobago, and RCF [Was: > [Proposal] RCF, a rich component library for JSF] > > ..... > Getting people into component programming is hard, the api is > unnecessarily complicated and overloaded with glue code, a > common base, > could ease tool development as well (we need well documented codegens > and uis for helping people to kickstart it). > > one third is inherent incompatibility problems > > and one third is questions > > > And the first question you geht, why so many components in the sets > double... > > And then we have Tobago, an excellent framework which feels like being > one big block designed for coherency and it has also problems working > together with the rest. > > I think it is long overdue to get a good corebase here and more > coherency, since there has to be done some overhaul for jsf > 1.2, why not > in a proper and decent manner. > > > The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information.
