I guess its just a fiscal move. Just received a new "RedHat" subscriber renewal requesting money... I hope this is not the end of open-public forums with JBoss/RedHat.
I am still a fan of JBoss. I use it whenever I can for various institutions.
I hope it still stays open-source open-forum.
Paul, the only one problem here are your own imaginations.
The relationship between the Ajax4jsf codebase and RichFaces codebase did not change after the code refactoring. RichFaces depends on Ajax4jsf, but not vice versa.
In plain English, it means you can continue to use a4j: tags, but not use rich: tags.
RichFaces components use loosely coupled architecture. I.e., you can extract them from the final package without harming the rest functionality.
Still have a RichFaces-phobia ?
Instead of richfaces-ui.XXXXX.jar, take core-XXXXXX.jar
For nightly build of 3.1.3 SNAPSHOT, it is:
richfaces-api.jar + richfaces-impl.jar + core.jar = Ajax4jsf
richfaces-ui.jar = core.jar + rich: components
So, use core.jar instead of richfaces-ui.jar and you will be "save" using pure Ajax4jsf.
P.S. I see everybody have a fun playing with misunderstanding what is the difference between the free product and paid subscription. However, RichFaces is not a part of this carnival yet. The primary motivation for refactoring was to separate shared part (-api), deployed once per server from the rest code deployed with each application.
Excellent! I most humbly accept the explanation.
I have been working with several other libraries that have moved from the realm of open-source to closed.
Other than that, I could have been imagining some of it :)
Ok, no phobia, for the Rich-Faces. I have run into troubles with cross library use on the same component tree when they both use Ajax4JSF. It seems that one can only work with one at a time.
Once more I am happy to see its my imagination.