Ryan Lubke wrote:
> I've logged an enhancement request for this:
> https://javaserverfaces.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=641
I've checked in the fixes for inclusion into the final release of 1.2_05
(no, no date has been picked yet).
>
> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>