On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Werner Punz <werner.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to explain, I noticed that we probably need a special response writer
> impl which tries to determine script blocks the way
> Trinidad does it to send the scripts as separate entities in the ppr
> response. I wanted to check if Mojarra already had something along those
there is a user/dev list for mojarra, right ?
> lines implemented and if not, wanted to send them a bug notification,
> because this is the standard way to handle inline scripts over the component
> api. (startTag("script usually should trigger a deferred
> writing of the next responseWriter commands, in a special eval section)
>
> So before doing this I want to clear this up once and for all!
> As I said I am not eager to touch mojarra code in this regard, but I
> personally would prefer to be in sync in both implementations in such corner
> areas partially not covered by the spec!
IMO this is critical;
-M
>
>
>
> Werner
>
>
> Werner Punz schrieb:
>>
>> Hello everyone I wanted to start a legal discussion here regarding the
>> status of Mojarra and our codebase.
>>
>> As far as I understood it is following.
>> The mojarra license prevents us from using their code, while they can use
>> ours, this is fine with me the Apache license is more liberal.
>>
>> The Mojarra and Apache license however do not prevent that we can have an
>> occasional look into the mojarra codebase to check things out which
>> are not 100% clearly defined, so that we are in sync there, or to prevent
>> external patches being applied which might have mojarra code inside (we had
>> that once in the past with comments copy pasted from the spec or mojarra)
>>
>> Am I right or wrong?
>>
>> I am just asking to clear this up once and for all.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Werner
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
