I use basic jsf, I avoid anything too fancy as it'll most likely break on some browser.
If I want something with a funky layout I write my own custom component. There's tons of JSF haters out there and it's not perfect, but... find me something better (both technically and standards/supported wise). Right now the best alternative I know of is plain jsp. I'd rather use plain jsp than most other frameworks out there. On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Joachim Schrod <jsch...@acm.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > Looking at the past few months, it's quite clear that the Trinidad > project is dead for all practical purposes. Almost all emails on > this mailing list concerning it are not answered. New releases are > tagged in SVN, but nobody finds the time to actually do them. I.e., > there is neither an active user community nor an active developer > community behind it. If one wants to use Trinidad, effectively, one > has to become a major developer in that project. > > Well, shit happens; I'm active in open source development since 30 > years, and know how this happens. Luckily, it's better than its > proprietary counterparts that close down the shop completely, when > development interest fades. > > So, to the readers of this mailing list, how do you use JSF nowadays? > -- Do you cope with the basic JSF components, that are made > available by MyFaces? Without trees, scrollable data tables, > and such? > -- Do you use another component library (RichFaces, ICEFaces -- > what else is available)? > -- Have you skipped ship and moved to Wicket or other component > libraries / frameworks? > > I would be very much interested to hear how you do modern Web app > development nowadays, with a full-fledged component library, not on > the very basic HTML/JSF-level. Is JSF still the way to go? > > Thanks a lot for your input and your patience in discussing that issue. > > Joachim > > -- > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Joachim Schrod, Roedermark, Germany > Email: jsch...@acm.org > > -- Ted.
