On 6/7/06, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, Jacob asked me if I'd like to join up. If I'd join, then as an
individual.
Why not as the official ASF representative for JSF.next?
Of course there should be an official vote, but from my POV there
speaks nothing against you joining
+1 on Martin.
Eventuelly I'd like to join as an individual. but Martin should be the
ASF JSF guy.
-Matthias
On 6/8/06, Manfred Geiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/7/06, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, Jacob asked me if I'd like to join up. If I'd join, then as an
+1 for Mr. M
Dennis Byrne
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 04:05 PM
To: 'MyFaces Development'
Subject: Re: [JSF 1.2] question
+1 on Martin.
Eventuelly I'd like to join as an individual. but Martin should be the
ASF JSF
Yeaa, lets give him fun ;-)
+1 for Doc M
Mario
+1 for Mr. M
Dennis Byrne
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 04:05 PM
To: 'MyFaces Development'
Subject: Re: [JSF 1.2] question
+1 on Martin.
Eventuelly I'd
+1On 6/8/06, Mario Ivankovits [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeaa, lets give him fun ;-)+1 for Doc MMario +1 for Mr. M Dennis Byrne -Original Message- From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 04:05 PM To: 'MyFaces Development' Subject: Re: [JSF 1.2
Wessendorf [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2006 04:05 PM
To: 'MyFaces Development'
Subject: Re: [JSF 1.2] question
+1 on Martin.
Eventuelly I'd like to join as an individual. but Martin should be the
ASF JSF guy.
-Matthias
On 6/8/06, Manfred Geiler [EMAIL
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tracking system), but there hasn't been a formal roadmap for JSF.nextso is JSF.next the project name for it?No, JSF.next is shorthand for whatever version follows JSF 1.2
. Without a formal roadmap, there's no guarantee that the next version
Well, Jacob asked me if I'd like to join up. If I'd join, then as an individual.I have some very specific ideas about JSF 2.0, though.regards,MartinOn 6/7/06,
Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tracking system), but there hasn't
Any reason for keeping [1] ?
-Matthias
[1] http://tinyurl.com/gjdxe
On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah,
thanks. Some are some issues also the reasons, why UIComponent is not
an interface?
-Matthias
On 6/5/06, Adam Winer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Backwards
CONVERTER_ID = javax.faces.DoubleTime
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any reason for keeping [1] ?
-Matthias
[1] http://tinyurl.com/gjdxe
On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah,
thanks. Some are some issues also the reasons, why UIComponent is
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CONVERTER_ID =javax.faces.DoubleTimeLooks like a spec bug due to a cut-n-paste error in the RI's API classes. If so, the correct thing to do would be to report feedback via the website on the spec cover (
Created a ticket [1]
btw. there was version 2.0 already mentioned. Any kickoff for JSF 2.0 ideas yet?
-Matthias
[1] https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=176
On 6/6/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL
On 6/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Created a ticket [1]btw. there was version 2.0 already mentioned. Any kickoff for JSF 2.0 ideas yet?Ideas are being gathered (you can submit your favorites via the same issue tracking system), but there hasn't been a formal roadmap for
tracking system), but there hasn't been a formal roadmap for JSF.next
so is JSF.next the project name for it?
that happens, it would be very much appropriate that Apache have a
representative on the EG, and it would seem to make the most sense that this
rep be someone from the MyFaces
Hi,
does anybody know why the methods added to ViewHandler or
ExternalContext in 1.2 are not abstract, like their *old* JSF 1.1
counterparts ?
-Matthias
--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Backwards compatibility - at least of a sort; you won't get
AbstractMethodErrors when using 1.1-compiled subclasses.
-- Adam
On 6/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
does anybody know why the methods added to ViewHandler or
ExternalContext in 1.2 are not abstract, like
Ah,
thanks. Some are some issues also the reasons, why UIComponent is not
an interface?
-Matthias
On 6/5/06, Adam Winer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Backwards compatibility - at least of a sort; you won't get
AbstractMethodErrors when using 1.1-compiled subclasses.
-- Adam
On 6/5/06, Matthias
17 matches
Mail list logo