yes, cdi please, beceause it's really KSR-299 container independent. Otherwise I would check it in to OWB ;)
LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> wrote: > From: Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> > Subject: Re: [TOMAHAWK] CDI contributions to tomahawk? > To: "MyFaces Development" <dev@myfaces.apache.org> > Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 7:15 AM > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:14 AM, > Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> > wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > wrote: > >> Oki, sounds good to me! > >> > >> Which things to start with? > >> > >> As I already explained, there may be a few scopes > which might ease the life of a JSF developer. > >> > >> Another area are interceptors. Doing a > @Transactional interceptor is pretty easy. @Secured > interceptor? just a few ideas... > >> > >> And who is doing the project setup? > > > > here; the empty folder structure is enough, right ? > > what name should we use "cdi" or "openwebbeans" ? > > I think that CDI is probably enough.. > > https://svn.apache.org//repos/asf/myfaces/extensions/ > > We would have a > https://svn.apache.org//repos/asf/myfaces/extensions/cdi > SOON.. > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > >> > >> txs and LieGrue, > >> strub > >> > >> --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Jakob Korherr <jakob.korh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> From: Jakob Korherr <jakob.korh...@gmail.com> > >>> Subject: Re: [TOMAHAWK] CDI contributions to > tomahawk? > >>> To: "MyFaces Development" <dev@myfaces.apache.org> > >>> Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 1:43 AM > >>> also +1 for a new extensions module! > >>> > >>> ..and I'd really like to contribute to that > too :) > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Jakob > >>> > >>> 2010/1/15 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> > >>> > >>> +1 for a new extensions > >>> module > >>> regards,gerhard > >>> > >>> > >>> http://www.irian.at > >>> > >>> Your JSF powerhouse - > >>> JSF Consulting, Development and > >>> Courses in English and German > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> 2010/1/14 Matthias Wessendorf > >>> <mat...@apache.org> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Hey Mark, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Mark Struberg > <strub...@yahoo.de> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Hi folks! > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > I'm working on the Apache Implementation > of > >>> JSR-299 OpenWebBeans and I'm looking forward > to add more > >>> support for JSF-2 via providing portable CDI > extensions. > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > I already implemented an Extension for > the > >>> javax.faces.beans.ViewScoped in our > openwebbeans-jsf module, > >>> but honestly think that this is not the right > place, because > >>> it is really CDI-container independent. Plus, > I have a few > >>> other ideas which may serve the Apache JSF > community. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > So, because those extensions are both JSF > container > >>> independent and also CDI container > independent, what about > >>> adding them to tomahawk-2 ? > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > The extensions I have in mind are > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > 1.) moving the CDI support for the > @ViewScoped as > >>> mentioned above from openwebbeans-jsf to > tomahawk. > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > 2.) a new @ViewConversationScoped. > Usually > >>> @ConversationScoped beans have the same > lifecycle as > >>> @RequestScoped beans if no > Conversation#begin() will get > >>> called in an action. Which means that one will > always get a > >>> fresh instance of a @ConversationScoped bean > if e.g. the > >>> validation fails before the begin() can be > called. The > >>> lifecycle of @ViewConversationScoped bean > would begin with > >>> the first view invocation and end at the end > of the request > >>> in which the conversation gets closed. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> that's neat; > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > 3.) a new @ViewRequestScoped. This is > basically the > >>> same as @ViewScoped, but the contextual > instance will stay > >>> available until the end of the request and > will not get > >>> destroyed after the action continues on a > return > >>> "nextPage";. This may be tricky if the > following > >>> view accesses the same bean as the previous > view - any > >>> suggestions on how this should behave are > welcome. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> not sure I get that :-) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > wdyt? > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > a) is tomahawk the right place (at least > for 2 and > >>> 3)? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> No. > >>> > >>> Why not adding to here: > >>> > >>> https://svn.apache.org//repos/asf/myfaces/commons/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> or > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> https://svn.apache.org//repos/asf/myfaces/extensions/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> That would make them also independent for a > certain > >>> component suite ;-) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > b) would the functionality be useful for > JSF-2 > >>> developers? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> sounds useful to me! > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -Matthias > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > txs and LieGrue, > >>> > >>> > strub > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>> > >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > >>> > >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >
