Re: EnumConverter in commons 1.1 branch
Volker Weber schrieb: Hi, Leonardo has just deleted the EnumConverter from the jsf1.1 branch of commons. This converter was the reason for me to use a snapshot version in our production application. Is it really necessary to have the commons jsf1.1 branch java 1.4 compatible? I know jsf1.1 is, but commons is an extension, so why should we restrict commons? We may provide a retroweaved (if this is possible with this Converter) release for 1.4 users, as we do for tobago. I think we really *should* have commons-1.1 compatible with java1.4. Setting up retroweaver, etc. is a pain in the butt. So if *you* (Volker) can provide a clean and simple patch to get this working, fine. But otherwise I'm happy with removing EnumConverter from commons1.1. You can always build the EnumConverter yourself, however you wish. Regards, Simon
Re: EnumConverter in commons 1.1 branch
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Weber schrieb: Hi, Leonardo has just deleted the EnumConverter from the jsf1.1 branch of commons. This converter was the reason for me to use a snapshot version in our production application. Is it really necessary to have the commons jsf1.1 branch java 1.4 compatible? I know jsf1.1 is, but commons is an extension, so why should we restrict commons? We may provide a retroweaved (if this is possible with this Converter) release for 1.4 users, as we do for tobago. I think we really *should* have commons-1.1 compatible with java1.4. I think that this is not necessary. Trinidad 1.0.x (which is the JSF 1.1 version) supports only Java5. Setting up retroweaver, etc. is a pain in the butt. So if *you* (Volker) can provide a clean and simple patch to get this working, fine. But otherwise I'm happy with removing EnumConverter from commons1.1. just because of JSF 1.1 uses outdated Java version? -M -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: EnumConverter in commons 1.1 branch
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Weber schrieb: Hi, Leonardo has just deleted the EnumConverter from the jsf1.1 branch of commons. This converter was the reason for me to use a snapshot version in our production application. Is it really necessary to have the commons jsf1.1 branch java 1.4 compatible? I know jsf1.1 is, but commons is an extension, so why should we restrict commons? We may provide a retroweaved (if this is possible with this Converter) release for 1.4 users, as we do for tobago. I think we really *should* have commons-1.1 compatible with java1.4. I think that this is not necessary. Trinidad 1.0.x (which is the JSF 1.1 version) supports only Java5. Setting up retroweaver, etc. is a pain in the butt. So if *you* (Volker) can provide a clean and simple patch to get this working, fine. But otherwise I'm happy with removing EnumConverter from commons1.1. just because of JSF 1.1 uses outdated Java version? I may have spoken too soon. For myfaces core 1.1.x I think we should definitely stay with -source 1.4 -target 1.4 options. There won't be a whole lot of people running it on java1.4, but we currently support it so should stay with it. I guess that commons-1.1.x *could* be run by different rules. It is new, so we won't break any existing users if java15 is set as the minimum. Pros for java15 as minimum in commons-1.1: * can have EnumConverter * internal code can be cleaner * ??? Cons: * some users stuck on JSF1.1 + java14 might not be able to use the new lib. * ??? Anyone else got pros/cons? I can't think of anything particularly convincing either way.. Regards, Simon
Re: EnumConverter in commons 1.1 branch
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Weber schrieb: Hi, Leonardo has just deleted the EnumConverter from the jsf1.1 branch of commons. This converter was the reason for me to use a snapshot version in our production application. Is it really necessary to have the commons jsf1.1 branch java 1.4 compatible? I know jsf1.1 is, but commons is an extension, so why should we restrict commons? We may provide a retroweaved (if this is possible with this Converter) release for 1.4 users, as we do for tobago. I think we really *should* have commons-1.1 compatible with java1.4. I think that this is not necessary. Trinidad 1.0.x (which is the JSF 1.1 version) supports only Java5. Setting up retroweaver, etc. is a pain in the butt. So if *you* (Volker) can provide a clean and simple patch to get this working, fine. But otherwise I'm happy with removing EnumConverter from commons1.1. just because of JSF 1.1 uses outdated Java version? I may have spoken too soon. For myfaces core 1.1.x I think we should definitely stay with -source 1.4 -target 1.4 options. There won't be a whole lot of people running it on java1.4, but we currently support it so should stay with it. I guess that commons-1.1.x *could* be run by different rules. It is new, so we won't break any existing users if java15 is set as the minimum. Pros for java15 as minimum in commons-1.1: * can have EnumConverter * internal code can be cleaner * ??? Cons: * some users stuck on JSF1.1 + java14 might not be able to use the new lib. * ??? Anyone else got pros/cons? I can't think of anything particularly convincing either way.. Pros: * can have DateRestrictValidator I'll go with java15 as minimum for commons. Regards, Simon
