RE: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-03 Thread Kito D. Mann
> -Original Message- > From: Scott O'Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 3:21 PM > To: MyFaces Development > Cc: 'Gary VanMatre' > Subject: Re: JSF 2.0 component set > > I foresee an exact copy of the functionality outlined by shale-test, > only with portlet mo

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-03 Thread Scott O'Bryan
Kito - ShaleTest is already JSF 1.2 Scott Kito D. Mann wrote: -Original Message- From: Scott O'Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 3:21 PM To: MyFaces Development Cc: 'Gary VanMatre' Subject: Re: JSF 2.0 component set I foresee an exact copy of the functional

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-03 Thread Scott O'Bryan
I don't really see why the physical location affects the ability to fix bugs or do enhancements in parallel, unless it depends on some common implementation classes. Or, are you talking more about releases? Well releases are part of it. I was meerly bringing up that the Bridge (even MyFaces

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-03 Thread Gary VanMatre
Yeah, Craig was doing that just before one of the apache conferences - the one in Austin. We had a co-presentation. He was the primary and instead of putting together the slides, he was working on the 1.2 mock objects. Scott, you know that I'm *not* the kind of guy that is good with public sp

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-03 Thread Gary VanMatre
-- Original message -- From: "Scott O'Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I don't really see why the physical location affects the ability to fix bugs > > or do enhancements in parallel, unless it depends on some common > > implementation classes. Or, are you talking

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-04 Thread Paul Spencer
Gary, I also use shale-test. One of the feature in the unreleased 1.1.0 allows you the test against any JSF 1.1/1.2 implementation without having to replace the faces.xml configuration inside the test. Thus keeping the test framework independent from an implantation. Which is a good thing an

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-04 Thread Paul Spencer
Gary, I also use shale-test. One of the feature in the unreleased 1.1.0 allows you the test against any JSF 1.1/1.2 implementation without having to replace the faces.xml configuration inside the test. Thus keeping the test framework independent from an implantation. Which is a good thing and so

Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-04 Thread Scott O'Bryan
Yeah, the conversation has already gone on longer then I intended. I was merely expressing sentiments that the moving of shale-test is not something I would oppose. It is frustrating though to have to port the bridges ExternalContext logic to another platform. The logic in JSF is largely tiv

RE: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-04 Thread Kito D. Mann
> -Original Message- > From: Scott O'Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: 'MyFaces Development'; 'Gary VanMatre' > Subject: Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 componen

RE: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set)

2008-04-04 Thread Kito D. Mann
> -Original Message- > From: Scott O'Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:12 PM > To: MyFaces Development > Subject: Re: shale-test location (was RE: JSF 2.0 component set) > > Yeah, the conversation has already gone on longer then I