I've logged an enhancement request for this:
https://javaserverfaces.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=641
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>