Yes.. I'm totally +1 for doing this in impl.. :). I think it would greatly slim down our code. To a large extent, I think we've been a bit lazy in getting rid of old api's..
Sent from my iPhone On Oct 5, 2011, at 7:39 AM, Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> wrote: most of the deprecated stuff is in the impl module. there are a lot of deprecated classes. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2011/10/5 Scott O'Bryan <[email protected]> > ** > The "backward compatibility" library might be an interesting idea. It just > won't always be possible if an existing class has deprecated methods on it. > I don't know how many Deprecated classes we have. > > Scott > > > On 10/05/2011 07:07 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: > > basically i agree with mark. at some point we have to get rid of the old > stuff (esp. >pre< jsf stuff). > at least we can move the deprecated parts to the mentioned backward > compatibility module (if needed). > in combination with shade there shouldn't be a problem at all and it forces > us to cleanup and re-visit those old parts. > > @scott: > for sure it has to be a community decision. > > regards, > gerhard > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > 2011/10/5 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >> My intention is not to break something, and I was ONLY talking about the >> JSF-2 version of Trinidad. >> If there is code which just makes no sense at all in JSF-2, then we should >> in MY opinion kill this code. >> If it doesn't make sense for Trinidad, then it is highly likely that it >> also don't make sense for ADF anymore, right? >> >> IF some parts are still needed by some known 3rd party libs, then those >> parts can of course remain. >> >> >> But at the end of the day maintaining Trinidad will become more and more >> problematic if we don't get rid of long time obsolete stuff. >> >> Again: only my personal opinion and experience. >> >> I assume that ADF also has a JSF-1 and a separate JSF-2 branch. All the >> JSF-1 stuff would of course remain the way it is currently! >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Scott O'Bryan <[email protected]> >> > To: [email protected] >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 2:20 PM >> > Subject: Re: [trinidad] cleanup >> > >> > We could, yes. But we would force people to migrate apps which, perhaps >> > is not a bad thing but traditionally we've taken a full vote before >> > changing/removing API's in Trinidad because, doing so, incurs additional >> > cost on the other frameworks which are using Trinidad as a foundation. >> > >> > Any company which provides Trinidad as a foundation for other framework >> > code (like Oracle's ADFFaces) benefits from NOT breaking users of the >> > framework every release and, frankly, I see a lot of value in keeping >> > them around 'if possible'. >> > >> > Like I say, I'm not opposed to it, but I suppose I take more of a Java >> > ZEN approach to deprecation of API's. >> > >> > Scott >> > >> > On 10/05/2011 05:41 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >> I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. >> >> >> >> Trinidad-2 is for JSF-2 upwards exclusively, isn't? >> >> >> >> If so, then we can easily get rid of all the old dust which just >> confuses >> > people. >> >> >> >> Furthermore there seems to be a few compat problems with JSF-2 f:ajax >> which >> > can only be resolved by carefully cleaning those areas up. >> >> Just leave behind the old stuff. >> >> >> >> >> >> LieGrue, >> >> strub >> >> >> >>> ________________________________ >> >>> From: Scott O'Bryan<[email protected]> >> >>> To: MyFaces Development<[email protected]> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 1:06 PM >> >>> Subject: Re: [trinidad] cleanup >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Well just because something is depth aged doesn't mean we can >> > remove it. It just means that an alternate means is suggested or >> something may >> > not work exactly as expected if used. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> A Prime example is ExternalContextUtils. That guy has been around >> > since JSF 1.1. It contains lots of functionality that wasn't present in >> > later versions of JSF, but now is. Use of the native objects should be >> > encouraged, but there is also something to be said about older code >> being able >> > to migrate easier to a later release. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Now I DO agree with removing the JSDoc and possibly the deprecations >> in >> > the impl, but I think it's important to keep any deprecations in the API >> for >> > backward compatibility. >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> >> >>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 4:32 AM, Gerhard >> > Petracek<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> both - there are just two possibilities: those parts are really >> > deprecated and we remove them (and refactor the rest) or we can't remove >> > them and the information (annotation and/or javadoc) isn't correct. >> >>>> >> >>>> regards, >> >>>> gerhard >> >>>> http://www.irian.at >> >>>> >> >>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >> >>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >> >>>> Courses in English and German >> >>>> >> >>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> 2011/10/5 Scott O'Bryan<[email protected]> >> >>>> >> >>>> Gerhard, by deprivation hints, I'm assuming you mean the >> > javadoc deprecations and not the annotations, right? >> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 3:09 AM, Gerhard >> > Petracek<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> hi @ all, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> there are still over 400 deprecations (via @Deprecated) and >> > nearly 400 via javadoc (not all of them overlap). >> >>>>>> a lot of them are in for a long time and some of them were >> > deprecated even before [1]. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> however, some parts are still used and can't be >> > removed. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> imo we should do a cleanup or remove the deprecation hints. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> regards, >> >>>>>> gerhard >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1229 >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> http://www.irian.at >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >> >>>>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >> >>>>>> Courses in English and German >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> >>>>>> >> >>> >> > >> > > >
