Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net>]

>How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
>impl in tomahawk?

This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .

Dennis Byrne

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>]

Just a reminder to fix major bugs related to the *core* on the branch
only.  We'll merge the branch down to the trunk after the release. 
This sounds like a tomahawk thing though ...

Sean

On 2/16/06, Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> FYI
>
> I did an update and deployed both simple & tiles.
>
> Simple worked fine (for the minimal clicking I did) but the tiles war failed
> on the welcome page
>
> http://localhost:8080/myfaces-example-tiles/page1.jsf
>
> Gave me;
>
> java.lang.NullPointerException
> org.apache.myfaces.application.jsp.JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.renderView(JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.java:165)
> org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.LifecycleImpl.render(LifecycleImpl.java:372)
> javax.faces.webapp.FacesServlet.service(FacesServlet.java:138)
> org.apache.myfaces.component.html.util.ExtensionsFilter.doFilter(ExtensionsFilter.java:124)
>
>
> I'll take a look but it does not appear to be related to the changes in the
> pom.
>
> TTFN,
>
>
> Bill Dudney
> MyFaces - myfaces.apache.org
> Wadi - incubator.apache.org/wadi
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:09 AM, Sean Schofield wrote:
>
> OK I think runtime will work.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, just committed the fixes. Did clean compile and some quick tests
> with resulting WARs. Simple and Sandbox examples seem ok now. Wap and
> Tiles seem to have some quirks that have nothing to do with my fixes.
>
> Details:
> 1. tomahawk: changed myfaces-impl dependency from compile to test
> (Ideally there should not be any dependency at all, but it's ok for
> our test classes to use impl code IMO)
> 2. tomahawk-examples-project: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
> 3. myfaces-example-simple and myfaces-example-wap: added
> commons-logging compile time dependency (was missing)
> 4. tomahawk-sandbox: added a TODO comment (there are compile time
> dependencies on myfaces-impl that have to get fixed)
> 5. tomahawk-sandbox-examples: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during compile time.
> Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.
>
> Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in this case.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
> there (I think.)
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> before I commit.
>
> Manfred
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> Stay tuned.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
>
> How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> impl in tomahawk?
>
> This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
>
> Dennis Byrne
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Matthias Wessendorf <mw...@gmail.com>]

Just looked at

no tiles,xml defined in web.xml

I'll change!

On 2/16/06, Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> FYI
>
> I did an update and deployed both simple & tiles.
>
> Simple worked fine (for the minimal clicking I did) but the tiles war failed
> on the welcome page
>
> http://localhost:8080/myfaces-example-tiles/page1.jsf
>
> Gave me;
>
> java.lang.NullPointerException
> org.apache.myfaces.application.jsp.JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.renderView(JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.java:165)
> org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.LifecycleImpl.render(LifecycleImpl.java:372)
> javax.faces.webapp.FacesServlet.service(FacesServlet.java:138)
> org.apache.myfaces.component.html.util.ExtensionsFilter.doFilter(ExtensionsFilter.java:124)
>
>
> I'll take a look but it does not appear to be related to the changes in the
> pom.
>
> TTFN,
>
>
> Bill Dudney
> MyFaces - myfaces.apache.org
> Wadi - incubator.apache.org/wadi
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:09 AM, Sean Schofield wrote:
>
> OK I think runtime will work.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, just committed the fixes. Did clean compile and some quick tests
> with resulting WARs. Simple and Sandbox examples seem ok now. Wap and
> Tiles seem to have some quirks that have nothing to do with my fixes.
>
> Details:
> 1. tomahawk: changed myfaces-impl dependency from compile to test
> (Ideally there should not be any dependency at all, but it's ok for
> our test classes to use impl code IMO)
> 2. tomahawk-examples-project: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
> 3. myfaces-example-simple and myfaces-example-wap: added
> commons-logging compile time dependency (was missing)
> 4. tomahawk-sandbox: added a TODO comment (there are compile time
> dependencies on myfaces-impl that have to get fixed)
> 5. tomahawk-sandbox-examples: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during compile time.
> Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.
>
> Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in this case.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
> there (I think.)
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> before I commit.
>
> Manfred
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> Stay tuned.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
>
> How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> impl in tomahawk?
>
> This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
>
> Dennis Byrne
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
Matthias Wessendorf
Zülpicher Wall 12, 239
50674 Köln
http://www.wessendorf.net
mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Bill Dudney <bd...@apache.org>]

FYI

I did an update and deployed both simple & tiles.

Simple worked fine (for the minimal clicking I did) but the tiles war  
failed on the welcome page

http://localhost:8080/myfaces-example-tiles/page1.jsf

Gave me;

java.lang.NullPointerException
	org.apache.myfaces.application.jsp.JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.renderView 
(JspTilesViewHandlerImpl.java:165)
	org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.LifecycleImpl.render(LifecycleImpl.java: 
372)
	javax.faces.webapp.FacesServlet.service(FacesServlet.java:138)
	org.apache.myfaces.component.html.util.ExtensionsFilter.doFilter 
(ExtensionsFilter.java:124)


I'll take a look but it does not appear to be related to the changes  
in the pom.

TTFN,

Bill Dudney
MyFaces - myfaces.apache.org
Wadi - incubator.apache.org/wadi



On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:09 AM, Sean Schofield wrote:

> OK I think runtime will work.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, just committed the fixes. Did clean compile and some quick tests
>> with resulting WARs. Simple and Sandbox examples seem ok now. Wap and
>> Tiles seem to have some quirks that have nothing to do with my fixes.
>>
>> Details:
>> 1. tomahawk: changed myfaces-impl dependency from compile to test
>> (Ideally there should not be any dependency at all, but it's ok for
>> our test classes to use impl code IMO)
>> 2. tomahawk-examples-project: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
>> compile to runtime
>> 3. myfaces-example-simple and myfaces-example-wap: added
>> commons-logging compile time dependency (was missing)
>> 4. tomahawk-sandbox: added a TODO comment (there are compile time
>> dependencies on myfaces-impl that have to get fixed)
>> 5. tomahawk-sandbox-examples: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
>> compile to runtime
>>
>> Manfred
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during  
>>> compile time.
>>> Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.
>>>
>>> Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in  
>>> this case.
>>>
>>> Manfred
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no  
>>>> harm
>>>> there (I think.)
>>>>
>>>> Sean
>>>>
>>>> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to  
>>>>> depend on
>>>>> tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sean
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
>>>>>> e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to  
>>>>>> impl etc.
>>>>>> I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
>>>>>> everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's  
>>>>>> needed
>>>>>> before I commit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Manfred
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some  
>>>>>>>> tests.
>>>>>>>> Stay tuned.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Manfred
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake  
>>>>>>>>>> and accessed
>>>>>>>>>> impl in tomahawk?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dennis Byrne
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>]

OK I think runtime will work.

Sean

On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, just committed the fixes. Did clean compile and some quick tests
> with resulting WARs. Simple and Sandbox examples seem ok now. Wap and
> Tiles seem to have some quirks that have nothing to do with my fixes.
>
> Details:
> 1. tomahawk: changed myfaces-impl dependency from compile to test
> (Ideally there should not be any dependency at all, but it's ok for
> our test classes to use impl code IMO)
> 2. tomahawk-examples-project: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
> 3. myfaces-example-simple and myfaces-example-wap: added
> commons-logging compile time dependency (was missing)
> 4. tomahawk-sandbox: added a TODO comment (there are compile time
> dependencies on myfaces-impl that have to get fixed)
> 5. tomahawk-sandbox-examples: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
> compile to runtime
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during compile time.
> > Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.
> >
> > Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in this case.
> >
> > Manfred
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
> > > there (I think.)
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> > > > tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
> > > >
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> > > > > e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> > > > > I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> > > > > everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> > > > > before I commit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Manfred
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sean
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > > > > > > Stay tuned.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Manfred
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > > > > > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dennis Byrne
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>]

Ok, just committed the fixes. Did clean compile and some quick tests
with resulting WARs. Simple and Sandbox examples seem ok now. Wap and
Tiles seem to have some quirks that have nothing to do with my fixes.

Details:
1. tomahawk: changed myfaces-impl dependency from compile to test
(Ideally there should not be any dependency at all, but it's ok for
our test classes to use impl code IMO)
2. tomahawk-examples-project: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
compile to runtime
3. myfaces-example-simple and myfaces-example-wap: added
commons-logging compile time dependency (was missing)
4. tomahawk-sandbox: added a TODO comment (there are compile time
dependencies on myfaces-impl that have to get fixed)
5. tomahawk-sandbox-examples: changed myfaces-impl dependency from
compile to runtime

Manfred



On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during compile time.
> Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.
>
> Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in this case.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
> > there (I think.)
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> > > tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> > > > e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> > > > I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> > > > everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> > > > before I commit.
> > > >
> > > > Manfred
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > > > > > Stay tuned.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Manfred
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > > > > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dennis Byrne
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>]

No, we don't want examples to depend on myfaces-impl during compile time.
Yes, we want myfaces-impl to be included in the WAR.

Therefore the correct scope is "runtime" instead of "compile" in this case.

Manfred



On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
> there (I think.)
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> > tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> > > e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> > > I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> > > everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> > > before I commit.
> > >
> > > Manfred
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
> > > >
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > > > > Stay tuned.
> > > > >
> > > > > Manfred
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > > > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dennis Byrne
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>]

Sorry meant to say we want those depend on the core.  There's no harm
there (I think.)

Sean

On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
> tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> > e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> > I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> > everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> > before I commit.
> >
> > Manfred
> >
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > > > Stay tuned.
> > > >
> > > > Manfred
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > > > >
> > > > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > > > >
> > > > > Dennis Byrne
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>]

Wait a sec.  The examples are different.  We *want* those to depend on
tomahawk and we want the dependencies to be included in the WAR.

Sean

On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
> e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
> I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
> everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
> before I commit.
>
> Manfred
>
>
> On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > > Stay tuned.
> > >
> > > Manfred
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > > >
> > > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > > >
> > > > Dennis Byrne
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>]

No, there are still some quirks to be fixed.
e.g. tomahawk examples must not have compile dependency to impl etc.
I have already fixed most of this, but I want to make sure that
everything builds fine and the wars contain every lib that's needed
before I commit.

Manfred


On 2/16/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.
>
> Sean
>
> On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> > Stay tuned.
> >
> > Manfred
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > > >impl in tomahawk?
> > >
> > > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> > >
> > > Dennis Byrne
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>]

I think the dependencies are already the way we want them.

Sean

On 2/16/06, Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
> Stay tuned.
>
> Manfred
>
>
>
> On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> > >impl in tomahawk?
> >
> > This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
> >
> > Dennis Byrne
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: Scope provided of myfaces-impl and myfaces-api in tomahawk and sandbox?

[Manfred Geiler <ma...@gmail.com>]

Ok, I will now fix all the tomahawk dependencies and do some tests.
Stay tuned.

Manfred



On 2/15/06, Dennis Byrne <de...@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> >How would we check if someone accidentally made a mistake and accessed
> >impl in tomahawk?
>
> This has happened at least once but it was fixed, so +1 .
>
> Dennis Byrne
>
>
>