Pass-through Attributes support for Trinidad

[Bernd Bohmann]

Hello,

with my latest commits on trinidad trunk pass-through Attributes should
work.

But there are some open questions.

Inside some Renderer there are several calls to responseWriter.startElement
with a component instance.

For example inputText will result following Html rendering:







  
  Username:


I could reduce the usage of responseWriter.startElement with a component
instance. But then it will be only rendered inside the span element and not
inside the input element.

Now I'm asking for feedback, suggestions and of cause bug reports

Thanks

Bernd

Re: Pass-through Attributes support for Trinidad

[Leonardo Uribe]

Hi

I think it is safe to only pass the component in
responseWriter.startElement when it is really wanted, and pass null in
other cases. Trinidad overrides the default (and updated)
HtmlResponseWriter, so it is necessary to update the ResponseWriter there
with the new JSF 2.2 logic. There is no other logic involved in that part,
in fact before JSF 2.2, the component was passed but it was just ignored.

In the example I would say the html  is the relevant one (the
 and the  is renderkit decoration).

regards,

Leonardo Uribe



2017-04-19 13:11 GMT-05:00 Bernd Bohmann :

> Hello,
>
> with my latest commits on trinidad trunk pass-through Attributes should
> work.
>
> But there are some open questions.
>
> Inside some Renderer there are several calls to
> responseWriter.startElement with a component instance.
>
> For example inputText will result following Html rendering:
>
>
> 
> 
> 
>
> 
>class="af_inputText_content" size="30" type="text">
>   
> Username:
> 
>
> I could reduce the usage of responseWriter.startElement with a component
> instance. But then it will be only rendered inside the span element and not
> inside the input element.
>
> Now I'm asking for feedback, suggestions and of cause bug reports
>
> Thanks
>
> Bernd
>

[jira] [Commented] (MYFACES-4109) Implement f:validateWholeBean

[Leonardo Uribe (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4109?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15976055#comment-15976055
 ] 

Leonardo Uribe commented on MYFACES-4109:
-

I have been trying to fix this one, but it has been proved challenging.

The big problem is there is a part that says this:

"... Class-level bean validation must operate on a sufficiently populated bean 
instance. This differs from JSF field-level validation, which prevents beans 
from being populated with invalid values. To accomodate this difference, the 
candidate bean must be copied, populated with the already-validated candidate 
values, and then subjected to class-level validation ..."

The copy is not a problem. The problem is how to populate the candidate values. 
After reading the spec it was mentioned that f:validateBean should keep track 
of the "candidate values", which I guess it is better to store them in the view 
transient map. But the "bean population" or "update model" step is done in 
update model phase, usually through ValueExpression.setValue(...). The problem 
resides in we need to update only the relevant bean involved in 
f:validateWholeBean and keep all other objects intact, so there is a visitTree 
invocations to apply it in the proper context (remember datatable rows can be 
problematic). So I guess there is some manipulation in the ELResolver chain to 
do this. f:validateBean has some code that helps a bit (get ValueReference), 
but I still don't get the right combination. The documentation in the spec is 
clear, it is just I don't get how make this detail work in a consistent way. 
The rule is how to be sure only the content of the cloned object is updated 
without affect anything from the model (which should be updated in update model 
phase). Of course it could be done parsing each EL expression and applying only 
those with the same "reference", but that is seen as a "last resource" scenario.

> Implement f:validateWholeBean
> -
>
> Key: MYFACES-4109
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4109
> Project: MyFaces Core
>  Issue Type: New Feature
>  Components: JSR-372
>Reporter: Leonardo Uribe
>Assignee: Leonardo Uribe
>
> Implement f:validateWholeBean as described in the spec javadoc. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Re: Migrate all MyFaces projects to Git

[Bernd Bohmann]

Until now, nobody could explain me the real technical improvement of
GitFlow.
We are talking about using git and not GitFlow. Git does not require
GitFlow

At Apache we are only using process as much as needed and not as possible!
And my personal advice is:
Start with a model as simple as possible.

Regards

Bernd







On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Kito Mann  wrote:

> +1
>
> Wha's wrong with GitFlow?
>
> ___
>
> Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
> Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and consulting
> Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
> JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io - fresh Web Components info
> +1 203-998-0403 <(203)%20998-0403>
>
> * See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj
> 
> * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Bohmann <
> bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike pom looks
>> nice :-)
>> If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Bernd
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are some
>>> benefits moving to git.
>>>
>>> But when I see here:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/myfaces
>>>
>>> It says:
>>>
>>> mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git
>>>
>>> But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it.
>>>
>>> Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the CMS) and
>>> the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need the svn, so I agree
>>> it is a good idea to move only some subprojects to git.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Leonardo Uribe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>  Virus-free.
>>> www.avast.com
>>> 
>>> <#m_-1665615671155989291_m_312095376341812428_m_228356912083513587_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith :
>>>
 +1

 Couldn't agree more.

 Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology
 Marathon Computer Systems, LLC.

 On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann <
 bernd.bohm...@atanion.com> wrote:

> From my side a big
>
> +1
>
> I'm still happy with subversion but for others the collaboration is
> easier and the project visibility a little bit better.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
> Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" <
> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
>
>> +0
>> I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much
>> difference.
>>
>> 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more Apache
>>> projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any difference
>>> to me
>>> but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be
>>> present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community. It's much
>>> more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues.
>>>
>>> We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts with the
>>> 2.3
>>> release.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>
>>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Migrate all MyFaces projects to Git

[Kito Mann]

Hello Bernd,

I like GitFlow for coordinating with multiple developers. However, if
everyone is sending pull requests anyway, it's not quite as useful. It
makes sense when you have multiple developers that are committing to a
"develop" branch and provides guidelines for working with master for new
releases and hot fixes.

___

Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and consulting
Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io - fresh Web Components info
+1 203-998-0403

* See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj

* Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com


On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Bernd Bohmann  wrote:

> Until now, nobody could explain me the real technical improvement of
> GitFlow.
> We are talking about using git and not GitFlow. Git does not require
> GitFlow
>
> At Apache we are only using process as much as needed and not as possible!
> And my personal advice is:
> Start with a model as simple as possible.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Kito Mann  wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Wha's wrong with GitFlow?
>>
>> ___
>>
>> Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
>> Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and consulting
>> Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
>> JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io - fresh Web Components info
>> +1 203-998-0403 <(203)%20998-0403>
>>
>> * See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj
>> 
>> * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Bohmann <
>> bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike pom looks
>>> nice :-)
>>> If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Bernd
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1

 Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are some
 benefits moving to git.

 But when I see here:

 https://github.com/apache/myfaces

 It says:

 mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git

 But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it.

 Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the CMS) and
 the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need the svn, so I agree
 it is a good idea to move only some subprojects to git.

 regards,

 Leonardo Uribe



 
  Virus-free.
 www.avast.com
 
 <#m_-135240448576325838_m_-1665615671155989291_m_312095376341812428_m_228356912083513587_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith :

> +1
>
> Couldn't agree more.
>
> Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology
> Marathon Computer Systems, LLC.
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann <
> bernd.bohm...@atanion.com> wrote:
>
>> From my side a big
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I'm still happy with subversion but for others the collaboration is
>> easier and the project visibility a little bit better.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Bernd
>>
>> Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" <
>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> +0
>>> I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much
>>> difference.
>>>
>>> 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst :
>>>
 Hi,

 have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more
 Apache
 projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any difference
 to me
 but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be
 present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community. It's much
 more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues.

 We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts with the
 2.3
 release.

 Cheers
 Dennis

>>>
>>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Migrate all MyFaces projects to Git

[Kito Mann]

+1

Wha's wrong with GitFlow?

___

Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and consulting
Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io - fresh Web Components info
+1 203-998-0403

* See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj

* Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com


On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Bohmann  wrote:

> Hello
>
> I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike pom looks
> nice :-)
> If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out.
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe  wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are some benefits
>> moving to git.
>>
>> But when I see here:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/myfaces
>>
>> It says:
>>
>> mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git
>>
>> But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it.
>>
>> Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the CMS) and
>> the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need the svn, so I agree
>> it is a good idea to move only some subprojects to git.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Leonardo Uribe
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>  Virus-free.
>> www.avast.com
>> 
>> <#m_312095376341812428_m_228356912083513587_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith :
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Couldn't agree more.
>>>
>>> Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology
>>> Marathon Computer Systems, LLC.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann <
>>> bernd.bohm...@atanion.com> wrote:
>>>
 From my side a big

 +1

 I'm still happy with subversion but for others the collaboration is
 easier and the project visibility a little bit better.

 Regards

 Bernd

 Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" <
 andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:

> +0
> I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much
> difference.
>
> 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more Apache
>> projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any difference to
>> me
>> but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be
>> present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community. It's much
>> more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues.
>>
>> We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts with the
>> 2.3
>> release.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Dennis
>>
>
>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Migrate all MyFaces projects to Git

[Bernd Bohmann]

Hello

I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike pom looks
nice :-)
If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out.

Regards

Bernd

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe  wrote:

> +1
>
> Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are some benefits
> moving to git.
>
> But when I see here:
>
> https://github.com/apache/myfaces
>
> It says:
>
> mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git
>
> But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it.
>
> Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the CMS) and
> the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need the svn, so I agree
> it is a good idea to move only some subprojects to git.
>
> regards,
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_228356912083513587_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith :
>
>> +1
>>
>> Couldn't agree more.
>>
>> Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology
>> Marathon Computer Systems, LLC.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann > > wrote:
>>
>>> From my side a big
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I'm still happy with subversion but for others the collaboration is
>>> easier and the project visibility a little bit better.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Bernd
>>>
>>> Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" <
>>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
>>>
 +0
 I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much
 difference.

 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst :

> Hi,
>
> have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more Apache
> projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any difference to
> me
> but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be
> present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community. It's much
> more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues.
>
> We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts with the 2.3
> release.
>
> Cheers
> Dennis
>


>>
>