>From: Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi! > > I sent out an e-mail to the Shale mailing list a week or so ago about the > > possibility of merging Shale with MyFaces. Development of Shale has become > > somewhat stale, and I'd rather see MyFaces pickup the pieces than have the > > code base atrophy The overwhelming consensus for the Shale list is "yes" > > (and Craig is no exception). What does the MyFaces PMC think? > > > I am +1. > > I think we just have to define which modules we would like to take over: > (BTW, this list is not to offend anyone, if this might happen, then > sorry in advance - it might be just due to not sensitively enough > choosen english wording.) > > > * Application Controller > Don't know. I thought action oriented frameworks are outdated, though, > Seam seems to introduce this paradigm again too. >
-1 > * Clay > Don't know. I am happy that we (I) moved away from html to components. > +0 I'm pretty certain that JSF 2 will have some kind of template language that is not JSP. I'm also certain that it won't try inheritance but will most likely look like facelets + jsftemplating. To be honest, I've never had a chance to use Clay outside of just building it. I know there are a couple adopters that we should consider feedback from. Actually, I'm looking forward too trying it all over with the 2.0 jsf impl. > * Core Library > Might be a must have > > * Dialog Manager > * Dialog Manager (Basic Implementation) > * Dialog Manager (SCXML Implementation) > The Dialog Manager might be a next step for MyFaces Orchestra. Anyway, I > hope that one of the original developers is still there to help out with > things. > +1 > * Remoting > Unsure, as most of this can be done with PPR too. > +1 JSF 2.0 will have resource delivery that is based on Shale Remoting. > * Spring Integration > Unsure, I didn't get whats the advantage to the intregration with Spring > -1 > * Test Framework > Must have I think > +1 Shale test is a must. IMO, it's one of the best nuggets in the bunch. > * Tiger Extensions > Interesting, however, I'd like to tell everyone to use Spring as MB > facility. And then Spring needs to provide such annotations (which are > already existent I think) > +1 JSF 2.0 is also considering Shale Tiger in the specification. > * Tiles Integration > See Clay. > +0 Clay and tiles are two different things. I know that there needs to be some work done to make shale-tiles work with JSF 1.2 and integrate with tiles (tlp) 2.x. Rich ADF faces has a JSP templating feature that's pretty cool but don't have the rich nested composition options that tiles has. Unsure of the status of that one... > * Validator Support > A generic client/server validation library for JSF would be REALLY nice. > Just, I don't like the idea just having a single component for this > (val:commonsValidator), at least, this one needs to be extended. > -1 I did allot of work on commons validator and I really believe that the only way to make this work (client-side) is to couple it into a component library framework. > * View Controller > This needs to be reviewed and merged with the Orchestra one if possible > > +1 > I am not going to vote an any of these components yet, first, I'd like > to see a discussion about them. > The reason is simple, even MyFaces has some "man/women power" problems > currently I think. If no one is willing to pick up one of these modules > they are dead in MyFaces land too. > Point is, that too many dormand modules in MyFaces might harm the > MyFaces community. We might create a dormand section where we move those > modules then to express that we are waiting for someone with some urge > to pick them up again. > > Ciao, > Mario > Gary
