Hi,
> Well, initially, I think what the RI is doing is perfectly fine. From
> what I recall, there is nothing
> in the spec stating that only public properties of a StateHolder must be
> saved, so it seems Trinidad
> is making assumptions that perhaps it shouldn't.
I don't said that saving private properties from a StateHolder is wrong.
It looks like that the RI validator requires them.
Trinidad isn't making assumptions, it just uses the validate(...)
method, nothing more
-Matthias
>
> > Do you want me to file an issue ?
> >
> Since we're using JDK 5 now, there really is no need for these extra
> properties, we could
> just use boxing/unboxing to handle this.
>
> If you want to open an enhancment request for this, feel free.
> > Thx,
> > Matthias
> >
> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/users@myfaces.apache.org/msg42199.html
> > [2] http://tinyurl.com/22ojtz
> > [3] http://tinyurl.com/3bvsdb
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org