done.

Bruno Aranda wrote:
I think we could add the FAQ: Can I use myFaces extensions with the JSF RI?


On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:32:54 -0500, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

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




-- 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