[
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-3635?page=com.atlassian.jira.plu...
]
Max Rydahl Andersen commented on JBIDE-3635:
--------------------------------------------
> From what I'm hearing we should simply ignoring everything
except what PortletBridge Beta 6 provides (i.e. independence of Richfaces), correct ?
Not sure what you mean
I'm saying there is no point in looking at supporting PortletBridge before Beta 6
since it would never be a supported or recommended thing to use in any scenario ?
Or is there a valid usecase for supporting beta4, beta5 for Seam/RF 3.2 projects
> If yes, what are the issues that will happen in a Seam portlet
project ? Will it not even start up ?
Yes
You are saying it won't even start up ? That is bad then ;(
> Will it be able to run pure JSF pages in portlet as long as no
richfaces components are on that page ?
If no RF settings are done yes.
ok
> Will pages with richfaces work fine as long as they are not
hooked into a portlet ?
EAP won't be affected
not sure what EAP has to do with that question ?
> Will it be able to run pure JSF pages in portlet as long as no
richfaces components are on that page ?
Fine with me
So you say it will work ?
Does this mean that we need to create two kind of the JSF portlet:
with and without Richfaces libraries and configuration?
Since portlet bridge B6 doesn't require Richfaces it sounds to me that additional RF
setup should be an option and not forced.
Fix compatibility issues with Portletbridge distribution
--------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBIDE-3635
URL:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-3635
Project: Tools (JBoss Tools)
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Portal
Affects Versions: 3.0.0.CR2
Reporter: Snjezana Peco
Assignee: Snjezana Peco
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira