On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 12:33 -0500, Leonardo Uribe wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Mike Kienenberger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/26/08, Volker Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Does it really matter if there's a commons 1.1? > Tomahawk 1.1 is fast > > > approaching the end of its lifecycle. > > > > > > Yes, it does. At least to me. > > > > Commons1.1 is not a tomahawk1.1 extension, it should > contain things > > for jsf1.1 application developpers. > > As long as there is active development in jsf1.1 > applications, there > > is a need for a commons1.1 version. > > > > We are just going in production with a tobago/jsf1.1 > application, > > developed within the last three years, > > and i can't see the time to switch to jsf1.2 in the next > months while > > we need to add extensions for specific customers. > > > Volker, > > I'm not saying we shouldn't have a commons 1.1. I think we > should. > What I'm saying is that even if we do not have a commons 1.1, > we > should stop maintaining the validators and converters as part > of > Tomahawk. If someone thinks they are worth supporting in > 1.1, they > should so as part of commons 1.1. > > We need a conclusion about this topic. > > One of the options presented is: > > 1. Deprecate converters and validators for tomahawk 1.1 (and let all > converters and validators where are, just note it). > 2. Move tomahawk converters and validators to myfaces-commons (1.2 > done, 1.1 branch in progress). > > Does the community agree with that proposal?
+1
