Thanks Matthias for all the work on the website!

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:29:15 +0100, Matthias Wessendorf
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Manfred,
> 
> thanks for feedback.
> 
> Ok so we will have as far as I see our current website app
> and soon simplified web app.
> 
> On subproject I don't want to run mailinglist on CVS
> 
> and so on. Only a special folder in CVS like the
> Struts guys do with their subprojects (eg flow)
> 
> @website: I just made some changes. Some other are following.
> One topic was Tomcat5.5.x issue.
> 
> I am just uploading it!
> 
> Did I miss something?
> 
> -Matthias
> 
> Manfred Geiler wrote:
> > Why *replace* current examples?
> > Let's start a new webapp called "simplesamples" or "tutorial" or
> > similar. At the time when every single component is part of this new
> > webapp we could still remove the old examples or make it deprecated. No
> > need to hurry, IMHO.
> >
> > +1 for simplified version
> > -1 for replacing the old examples now
> >
> > Regarding subproject:
> > Before dealing with the question of making a subproject for the
> > examples, we should rather think about making the extensions and
> > components a subproject, IMHO.
> > And if we speak of a subproject, we must also come to a common sense of
> > what we mean by that. Does subproject also mean a completely separated
> > CVS dir? That would make things unnecessary difficult (build process,
> > etc.), I think. Should we have separated mailing-lists? Hmm, even now
> > people sometimes have problems to differentiate between our two lists.
> > ;-) So, what remains, is the structure of our docs and the homepage.
> > Would be enough, IMHO. Clear separation of the kind "Getting started
> > with MyFaces Impl" , "Replacing RI", "MyFaces extended standard
> > components", "MyFaces custom components" and so on.
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Manfred
> >
> >
> > Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I thought about something like a *subproject* for our
> >> MyFaces examples sometimes before.
> >>
> >> We have now lot's of (different) applications that
> >> demonstrated the use of MyFaces (and its components)
> >>
> >> -the *hot* disscussed MyFaces-exmaple
> >> -Tiles example
> >> -WAP/WML example
> >> -the new HelloWorld example
> >>
> >> that is a lot's of good stuff!
> >>
> >> So why not creating a subproject for that?
> >> MyFaces is toplevel project and there is room
> >> for something like that.
> >>
> >> Struts has a similar facility. On SF they host
> >> some *cool* examples or enhancements that are
> >> not inside the *core* of Struts.
> >>
> >> We must not host our examples @sf, but we could
> >> start with something like
> >>
> >> http://myfaces.apache.org/examples
> >>
> >> so there is also room for some real world
> >> examples (using Spring, Hibernate, EJB,...)
> >> and also for the simplefied example.
> >>
> >> What do you think about something like that?
> >>
> >> -Matthias
> >>
> >> Sean Schofield wrote:
> >>
> >>> The vote is only on replacing the myfaces-examples with one that does
> >>> not use the menu, verbatim, etc.  I agree that a fancy application
> >>> that shows off MyFaces is a good idea.
> >>>
> >>> Right now though, the examples are mostly used to show how each
> >>> component works.  Its hard to focus on that when you are dealing with
> >>> subviews, menus, etc.  So again: Can we replace myfaces-examples with
> >>> the simplified version?  That is the question I am posing.
> >>>
> >>> As for the RI, those examples are not really relevant.  If you want to
> >>> know how to use the tree component you will need a simplified example
> >>> from MyFaces.
> >>>
> >>> sean
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:38:53 -0800, Derek Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Sorry, not going to vote here.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think what we need is multiple set of well-organized examples.
> >>>> Here're some ideas I can come up with:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. simple examples - more like the helloworld and guess number type of
> >>>> examples. This set of exmaples are simple and more generic.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. MyFaces specific examples - show the power of the new features
> >>>> MyFaces provides, e.g. new JSF components, tiles integration and
> >>>> portlet integration, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> 3. More complex real world examples - like Petstore or duke's
> >>>> bookstore application. It not only shows JSF, but also shows the
> >>>> integration between JSF, and other frameworks, e.g. Spring, Hibernate,
> >>>> JDO, EJB, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> If I have to vote, I would vote -1. The examples we have now are
> >>>> pretty good. It is always easy to get the simple examples, e.g. from
> >>>> Sun JSF RI and migrated it to MyFaces by simply replacing some jars.
> >>>>
> >>>> Derek
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 13:49:21 -0500, Sean Schofield
> >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> OK I am changing the subject to a simple vote.  +1 if you favor
> >>>>> *replacing* myfaces-examples with a simplified version that strips
> >>>>> away the menu stuff.  This is not a decision on how to handle testing.
> >>>>> I'd like Matthias to commit what I've sent him for reasons I
> >>>>> explained earlier.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 = yes simplified examples is better
> >>>>> -1 = no leave examples the way they are
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For reference, Matthias posted a WAR he made using the files I sent
> >>>>> him.  IMO you can easily imagine what this looks like without having
> >>>>> to do download it :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.apache.org/~matzew/myfaces-sean.war
> >>>>>
> >>>>> sean
> >>>>>
> >>>>> btw I vote +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 10:06:20 -0500, Sean Schofield
> >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Martin,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Matthias seemed to interpret your answer as favoring two sets of
> >>>>>> examples.  One for simple examples and one basically the way it is
> >>>>>> now.  I had a slightly different take on your answer.  I thought you
> >>>>>> were agreeing with Sylvain that we should have one set of test
> >>>>>> examples and one set of simple examples.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Are we both correct?  Did you mean that the current examples would be
> >>>>>> the test examples?  I don't personally think this is a good idea.
> >>>>>> Basically we will just be maintaining a second set of every example.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think the test examples do not have to be inside the menu, etc.
> >>>>>> Obviously you want a *single* test example (and simple example) that
> >>>>>> uses the menu.  But keeping every example inside the menu
> >>>>>> framework is
> >>>>>> what I object to.  Its harder to understand and maintain.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have a few more simple examples to contribute but I am waiting for
> >>>>>> this to be resolved.  Also I noticed Sylvain just updated his
> >>>>>> HtmlEditor example.  Since I've already done all the work to simplify
> >>>>>> the examples we should decide if we are going to use them before more
> >>>>>> changes are made.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> sean
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> 
> --
> Matthias We�endorf
> Aechterhoek 18
> DE-48282 Emsdetten
> Germany
> phone: +49-2572-9170275
> cell phone: +49-179-1118979
> email: matzew AT apache DOT org
> url: http://www.wessendorf.net
> callto://mwessendorf (Skype)
> icq: 47016183
>

Reply via email to