On 21 Apr 2009, at 22:34, Jay Balunas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 21 Apr 2009, at 22:17, Jay Balunas wrote:
>>>> faces (which would have page actions, faces messages, and
>>>> perhaps engulf the current ui too)
>>> Sounds good. We should impl page actions on top of JSF2 events I
>>> think. FacesMessages aren't needed as they are now stored in the
>>> flashscope by default.
>> Pete - We had talked about having the ui component being separate
>> from seam core and not depend on it. This would allow application
>> to who are not using seam to take advantage of the ui component.
>> This came up a while back in a discussion about the RichFaces
>> validation components and moving them to seam-ui.
>> Would this current approach satisfy that?
> Yes. As I keep saying "there is no Seam core" in Seam 3 - all
> modules will *just* depend on any JSR-299 impl :-) But you are
> actually asking "Can the faces module degrade gracefully such that
> what can be used in a plain JSF2 environment - no 299 - works" I
I misspoke regarding seam-core :-(
I really mean depending on any other seam classes in other modules
( including 299). If we are going to migrate some RichFaces
components to seam-ui. I just want to make sure we don't end up
requiring users to include X # of seam modules, and/or 299.
iirc - I think we were discussing some of the bean validation code.
We should discuss other components as well.
Ok, well we can add extra rules to this module:
* no non-optional dependencies on other jars (must be self contained)
* bean validation must have no deps outside BV api
I think it would be sensible to add a short contract.txt to each
module to include these requirements. Shane, could you add these?