Hi Just one minor comment (I didn't now it): public review for jsf 2.0 is now available at:
http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=314 regards Leonardo Uribe On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > hello jan-kees, > > first of all: thank you for your contributions! > > i had a quick look at some of your patches. > and i compared them with the snapshot version of mojarra + the javadoc [1] > > the patches i compared look similar to the current source code of the > snapshot (method order, var names,...) and also some javadoc comments are > the same (example for the javadoc: [2] and [3]). > there are also classes with slight variations. > > anyway, we have to take care that we don't violate the licenses used by > mojarra (cddl and gpl). > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/nonav/snapshots/pr1/javadocs/index.html > [2] > https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/nonav/snapshots/pr1/javadocs/javax/faces/render/RenderKitWrapper.html > [3] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394962/RenderKitWrapper.patch > > > > 2008/12/2 Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hello same here I wanted to check in the patches on Wednesday which >> currently is my JSF 2.0 day as well... >> So we might be able to share the work. >> Btw. Jan have you signed the CLI or CLA already? >> Unfortunately we have to be a little bit nitpicky about having this signed >> not to get into legal trouble ;-) >> >> Werner >> >> >> Simon Lessard schrieb: >> >>> Hi Jan-Kees, >>> >>> Yeah I saw the patches, thanks for that. I'll check them in/comment them >>> on Wednesday evening which is my JSF 2.0 day. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> ~ Simon >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >>> >>> From my point of view, it's nice to do something back to the >>> community, instead of only using MyFaces... >>> >>> I've been implementing some classes yesterday. Created a Jira ticket >>> for all of them (sometimes grouped similar classes together). >>> >>> Please look at it and tell me if this is the right way to do things. >>> I'm sure there are things to improve. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Jan-Kees >>> >>> @Matthias: Good to hear my help is appreciated. >>> >>> >>> 2008/12/1 Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: >>> > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 1:21 AM, Simon Lessard >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> wrote: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> Yes you can, but make sure to create a JIRA ticket for every >>> change. You'll >>> >> find that most new classes and methods are already there though, >>> but some >>> >> new ones just popped with the public review version. >>> > >>> > it is great to see more and more active folks here! >>> > >>> > -Matthias >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Regards, >>> >> >>> >> ~ Simon >>> >> >>> >> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel >>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> All right, in that case, shall I start implementing those new >>> API classes? >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm sure there's little fun for you guys in implementing all >>> those >>> >>> interfaces/etc. ;-) >>> >>> >>> >>> /Jan-Kees >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2008/11/29 Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: >>> >>> > Hi Jan-Kees, >>> >>> > >>> >>> > MyFaces has its own version of the javax.faces.8 within >>> myfaces-api.jar >>> >>> > file. That file obviously has the same content as Mojarra's, >>> but with >>> >>> > different code and thus a different bug/peformance base. >>> However I must >>> >>> > admit that most difference reside within the -impl >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Regards, >>> >>> > >>> >>> > ~ Simon >>> >>> > >>> >>> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel >>> >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Hi all, >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> It might be a stupid question, but where does the MyFaces >>> javax.faces >>> >>> >> codebase come from? Is it copied straight from Mojarra? Or >>> does this >>> >>> >> cause >>> >>> >> licensing issues and must all files be created by hand, >>> based on the >>> >>> >> spec? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> A.t.m., many of the new classes, like the pdl.facelets >>> package are >>> >>> >> missing. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> If you guys want, I can start adding them to myfaces2 if it >>> needs to be >>> >>> >> done by hand. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Regards, >>> >>> >> Jan-Kees >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> 2008/11/27 Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't think just dropping the code will be enough. There >>> are some >>> >>> >>> contract difference between Facelets and Facelets in JSF >>> 2.0. Although >>> >>> >>> they're mostly compatible, some interfaces were added (see >>> pdl) and >>> >>> >>> the >>> >>> >>> createView contract was changed as well (forcing full tree >>> population >>> >>> >>> that >>> >>> >>> doesn't seem to be the case in Facelets code atm). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Furthermore, imho it's quite healthy to fork the code as >>> it's going to >>> >>> >>> start an improvement "competition" between Mojarra's >>> Facelets and our >>> >>> >>> Facelets, much like what happened when MyFaces was first >>> implemented, >>> >>> >>> much >>> >>> >>> faster than RI at the time, forcing the latter to improve >>> their own >>> >>> >>> code and >>> >>> >>> so on. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> That being said, if the community feels like we should >>> limit the >>> >>> >>> amount >>> >>> >>> of changes as much as possible (to include Facelets updates >>> and bug >>> >>> >>> fixes >>> >>> >>> every now and then for example), I could also abide to that. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ~ Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 3:26 AM, Werner Punz >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >>> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> Kito Mann schrieb: >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> Hey Simon, >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> Just curious: are you guys implementing Facelets from >>> scratch? >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>> I have not had a look yet at the current codebase, but to my >>> >>> >>>> knowledge >>> >>> >>>> facelets itself has been relizenced under ASF2 >>> >>> >>>> I would suggest just for the sake of keeping the >>> compatibility close >>> >>> >>>> no reimplementation just drag the code over, dont change >>> the packages >>> >>> >>>> if possible so that we at least there have a shared >>> codebase. >>> >>> >>>> It just does not make sense to do a full reimplementation or >>> >>> >>>> to fork the code, since there are no political issues >>> between the RI >>> >>> >>>> and >>> >>> >>>> MyFaces, on the contrary we have an excellent relationship! >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> Werner >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Matthias Wessendorf >>> > >>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>> > >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >
