> I will take a look at the issue that you filed as soon as I
> have a chance. Supporting Facelets was not a goal originally,
> but given the growth in popularity of the technology, it
> seems like a desirable enhancement.
Understood.
> There is nothing in the annotations library or the processor
> that is specific to Woodstock. It does presuppose a certain
> model of JSF component development, one that is focused on
> the component class. The idea is that you author component
> and renderer classes, and that all other artifacts are
> generated based on annotations that you add to the component
> and the renderer.
IIRC, the filenames, paths, etc were somewhat hard-coded, but I could be
wrong. I'll take another look.
> The processor does assume that it is processing an entire
> component library. It cannot, for example, generate metadata
> for one component, and then add an entry for that component
> in an existing faces-config file. The biggest obstacle to
> working with existing component libraries, is that you may
> not have the freedom to annotate the source.
Which is fine with me, as that is the approach I take. With the Sandbox
stuff, it's pretty much a 1-2 man show, with me doing the bulk of the
work, so I have pretty much total freedom to annotate all the classes.
Is the annotations jar available (via maven, for example) somewhere I
can easily download it in my build process?
-----
Jason Lee, SCJP
Senior Software Engineer
http://www.iec-okc.com