Ed Burns wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:36:29 -0700, Ryan Lubke <Ryan.Lubke_at_Sun.COM> said:
>>>>>>
>
> RL> jacob_at_hookom.net wrote:
>
>>> How would this relate to jsf-ext? I thought Ed wanted that to be the home of these kinds of things?
>>>
>>>
> RL> In some cases, like the NavigationHandler, there would be an RI
> RL> dependency, so it makes sense to
> RL> have it in an RI sandbox.
>
> RL> As to components, I've heard that Ed wanted to keep jsf-ext 'component
> RL> free' (or something there-abouts).
>
> Let me set the record straight on jsf-extensions.
>
> I'd love to have Jason's components there. Everything in jsf-ext is
> implementation neutral. Therefore, I think we need a sun-impl sandbox
> as well.
>
> I am happy to add anyone who already has jsf committer status to
> jsf-extensions, no questions asked, and I'd really like to avoid
> creating another place for people to look.
>
Ok - implementation independent components aside, does the basic
proposal sound
ok? Any ideas to improve on it?
>
> Ed
>
>