>From my perspective, I'd use Orchestra because it is really lightweight, in usage. Configuration is done once, and easy to re-use the orchestra specific cfg.
the nav-flow w/ Orchestra is plain JSF, that is a plus. -M On Nov 9, 2007 9:34 AM, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > I've just heard that Spring-Webflow will add JPA-support in the next > > release. We should dress warmer here ;) > > > Yes, I already know that. Well, competition is always good ;-) > > I see: > > 1) JBoss Seam, which might be very feature-full but which is also very > intrusive to your application and requires you to use a new programming > model. > BTW: I think Seam should be split into various modules, for example, the > ability to being able to have function calls with method parameters in > Facelets would be great to be usable without seam. > 2) Web-Beans: ditto > 3) Spring-Webflow, which might be a little less intrusive, but requires > you to use a configuration to describe the webflow, doesn't it? > 4) Orchestra, which is a very thin layer and nicely integrates into your > application, even a complex legacy one. The automatic conversation > starting with the ability to have some in parallel makes it VERY easy to > use. > > > Ciao, > Mario > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
