Hi Ed -
Thanks for reviewing this issue.
I am okay with leaving the code in place for the moment, as long as we
are removing this bit from the API doc:
> * <p class="changed_added_2_2">Before calling the corresponding
> method
> * on the superclass, verify that there is a current component so
> * that EL expressions that start with #{component} or #{cc} operate
> * as expected.</p>
And also removing any TCK test that verifies this requirement.
Is that what you had in mind?
Andy
On 3/14/13 12:27 PM, Edward Burns wrote:
> We have product completion criterion that states we cannot release with
> failing or ignored testcases. I feel that if I took this out, we'd see
> some failing testcases and I don't think we have time to fix them on a
> per-case basis as you suggest we should.
>
> How about we leave it for 2.2 and then we can take it out and replace
> the ComponentSystemEvent.processListener() with:
>
> public void processListener(FacesListener listener) {
> super.processListener(listener);
> }
>
> after the release? We can do this without breaking binary compatibility
> or even a signature change.
>
> Is this ok?
>
> Ed
>