> 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'm not on the PMC, but I wanted to state +1 for the record. From dealing with students and clients, I think this would be a good thing for JSF. > 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 I thought action oriented frameworks are outdated, though, 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. It's probably better to integrate any sort of direct request processing into the Remoting support (I know it's currently implemented using the Application Controller, but that's an implementation detail). Also, I don't know if anyone actually uses this. > > * Clay > Don't know. I am happy that we (I) moved away from html to components. -1. Although I know Clay has some supporters, Facelets and JSFTemplating are going to affect JSF 2.0 the most. I'd love to see some of the Clay people help out with Facelets, actually. > * Core Library > Might be a must have +1 > * 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. +0 I like the idea of integrating this with Orchestra, although I'm not convinced that Spring should be a requirement to use this feature. If that's the case, you might as well use Spring Web Flow. > * Remoting > Unsure, as most of this can be done with PPR too. +1 This is pretty useful and easy to use, and will affect JSF 2.0. > * Spring Integration > Unsure, I didn't get whats the advantage to the intregration with > Spring -1 This is pretty useless now as far as I can tell. > * Test Framework > Must have I think +1 > * 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 This will serve as a blueprint for JSF 2.0, and it's quite useful. Although it's nice to use Spring, not everybody does, and we shouldn't force people to do so. > * Tiles Integration > See Clay. +0 I'll abstain here and since I don't know much about the Tiles side of things. Let's just say that I think Tiles integration should "just work" in MyFaces and Shale. > * 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 haven't heard of too many people using this these days, since Ajax is usually easier to do these days. If this is a big desire by the community, it'd make more sense to integrate it as a proper set of validators or components. > * View Controller > This needs to be reviewed and merged with the Orchestra one if possible +1 This is a requirement, I think. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info
