Differences between revisions 3 and 4
Revision 3 as of 2006-09-15 16:23:11
Size: 1642
Comment:
Revision 4 as of 2009-09-20 23:01:39
Size: 1642
Editor: localhost
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
No differences found!

Whiteboard discusson - Establish a 'myfaces-components-commons' jar?

  • Mailing list threads
    • TODO
  • Identify the common code?
    • The dojo infrastructural classes and with its dependencies into the Tomahawk HTML class and AddResource class

    • The dojo javascripts (which once it is possible will be moved into weblets, but for now it has to be there)
    • Other reusable resources for a shared resource base
    • TODO
  • Where will the code live?
    • Split Tomahawk into multiple jars?
    • Establish a separately versioned module?
    • As part of the existing Shared module?

I propose that we use the commons jar to contain non-renderkit-specific components which should be usable in ANY JSF environment (Tobago, Tomahawk, Trinidad, ADFFaces, etc). This would include validators, converters, and non-rendering tags such as t:updateActionListener, t:aliasBean, t:saveState, a subclass of t:dataList that only iterates and doesn't render (always in simple mode), and whatever else we can identify as non-rendering. This commons jar is targeted at JSF users, not component developers. This commons jar would be available as part of a Tomahawk release, and would not be a separate release. We might distribute it as a separate product, but we would only release it when we release Tomahawk. -- Mike Kienenberger

I propose that we expand the existing shared module to be a place with common JSF code building block APIs that component developers can reuse. This would contain message bundle support, AddResource support, maybe dojo support, ValidatorBase, util classes, and so on. -- Mike Kienenberger

ComponentsCommons (last edited 2009-09-20 23:01:39 by localhost)