On Jul 20, 2010, at 7:52 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: > hi blake, > > @events: > libs like codi might benefit from such additional events. we could think > about a trinidad-support module. Sure > > @trinidad window map: > i'm still not convinced. i would use a scope provided by libs like orchestra, > codi,... > if there aren't quite a lot of users who use trinidad without such additional > frameworks, i would vote -0. Trinidad is purposefully not performing the actual bean management and injection inside of the scope. Trinidad is providing a map with a defined lifecycle. I would like Trinidad users to be able to configure this map to act as the window-scoped map implementation for whatever CDI implementation they are using.
-- Blake Sullivan > > regards, > gerhard > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > 2010/7/21 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> > Gerhard, > > Do you have any comments on this? > > -- Blake Sullivan > > On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:37 PM, Blake Sullivan wrote: > >> The Trinidad WindowManager defines a lifecycle for windows which includes >> events for windows being created, unloaded, reloaded closed. etc. The >> implementation is free to use as much JavaScript as it needs to in order to >> ensure better results, including more prompt clean up of resources. >> However, from an api standpoint, that is neither here nor there. Trinidad >> already has Window objects and it would seem natural that a consumer of the >> Window object would like to associate state with it. The first place they >> would look is on the Window object itself. From an api perspective, what is >> wrong with a method on the Window object that returns a Map? >> >> Consumers already use the fact that Windows have stable identifiers and >> fire lifecycle events to manage the storage themselves. This api handles >> that task for the simpler users of the Window class. >> >> -- Blake Sullivan >> >> >> On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >> >>> hi blake, >>> >>> why do you think trinidad would provide a better implementation? >>> >>> regards, >>> gerhard >>> >>> http://www.irian.at >>> >>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>> Courses in English and German >>> >>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>> >>> >>> >>> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>> Gerhard, >>> >>> If users want to use those implementations they should be able to and >>> Trinidad should be able to delegate to them. However, if Trinidad has a >>> Trinidad WindowManager installed, that WindowManager can do a much better >>> job than any of those implementations regarding managing the lifecycle of >>> the scope. In addition, if the application, or framework itself wants to >>> programmatically shove objects into the Map representing this scope (which >>> has always existed at least in the implementation), its weird that it >>> should all of a sudden have to start using a new set of apis. >>> >>> -- Blake Sullivan >>> >>> >>> On Jul 19, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>> >>>> hi blake, >>>> >>>> no - my suggestion was that it should be a feature which can be used >>>> independently. >>>> if users need a window scope and they use >>>> * cdi, they can use codi >>>> * spring, they can use orchestra (if we implement it there as well) >>>> * ~plain jsf, they should be able to use a simpler version which is >>>> independent of a special component lib (e.g. provided by myfaces-commons) >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> gerhard >>>> >>>> http://www.irian.at >>>> >>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>> Courses in English and German >>>> >>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>> >>>> >>>> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>>> Thanks Gerhard. >>>> >>>> Did you want Trinidad to be configurable to delegate to Orchestra if its >>>> available, in this case? >>>> >>>> -- Blake Sullivan >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 19, 2010, at 12:23 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi blake, >>>>> >>>>> it's similar to the conversation context id of orchestra - we just have >>>>> an id for every window. >>>>> >>>>> (in case of @WindowScoped we just add a component to the view-root >>>>> (before the page gets rendered). >>>>> the window id is stored as state of the component. in case of jsf 1.2 and >>>>> redirects we need an url parameter for the get-request. the >>>>> implementation is pluggable - so it's possible to provide a custom >>>>> implementation for storing and restoring the information. in case of jsf >>>>> 2.0+ and redirects you won't see an url parameter. in this case we use >>>>> the flash scope to store the required information.) >>>>> >>>>> i'll add all the details to the wiki page [1]. i've finished the >>>>> implementation of the first draft by the end of last week. so i've to >>>>> cleanup some parts and i've to write further javadoc and documentation. >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> gerhard >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/Extensions/CDI/DevDoc/Conversations >>>>> >>>>> http://www.irian.at >>>>> >>>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>>> Courses in English and German >>>>> >>>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>>>> What code actually associates the scope with the browser windows? For >>>>> example, in Trinidad, we have a WindowManager tasked with that job. >>>>> >>>>> -- Blake Sullivan >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 17, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> hi blake, >>>>>> >>>>>> @WindowScoped (provided by myfaces codi) is a portable extension for >>>>>> cdi. therefore not every project will be able to use it. >>>>>> >>>>>> anyway, imo it would be better to provide a cdi independent version of >>>>>> it e.g. in myfaces-orchestra and/or myfaces-commons. >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, >>>>>> gerhard >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.irian.at >>>>>> >>>>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>>>> Courses in English and German >>>>>> >>>>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2010/7/17 Jakob Korherr <[email protected]> >>>>>> Hi Blake, >>>>>> >>>>>> Just FYI: we have also implemented a window scope for MyFaces Codi >>>>>> (ext-cdi). Maybe you want to take a look at it ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Jakob >>>>>> >>>>>> 2010/7/17 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>> We currently have scopes for: >>>>>> Application >>>>>> Session >>>>>> PageFlow >>>>>> View >>>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we add a Map associated with each window or tab that the >>>>>> user is interacting with. This would slop into the scope hierarchy >>>>>> between the Session and PageFlow scopes. We would also expose the >>>>>> storage for the current window on the RequestContext. If no >>>>>> WindowManager was exposed and therefore there was no current Window, >>>>>> this Map would be the SessionMap. >>>>>> >>>>>> For high availability, each of the attributes stored in a Window's map >>>>>> would be stored as separate attributes in the Session. >>>>>> >>>>>> At least initially, we would not expose this map directly through its >>>>>> own top-level windowScope EL property. >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposed apis: >>>>>> >>>>>> RequestContext: >>>>>> >>>>>> /** >>>>>> * Returns a Map of objects associated with the current window if any. >>>>>> If there is no >>>>>> * current window, the Session Map is returned. >>>>>> * @return Map for storing objects associated with the current window. >>>>>> * @see org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.context.Window#getWindowMap >>>>>> */ >>>>>> public Map<String, Object> getWindowMap() >>>>>> >>>>>> Window >>>>>> >>>>>> /** >>>>>> * Returns the Map for storing data associated with this Window object. >>>>>> If the environment is >>>>>> * configured for fail-over, the contents of this Map must be >>>>>> Serializable. >>>>>> * @return The client data storage Map. >>>>>> */ >>>>>> public abstract Map<String, Object> getWindowMap(); >>>>>> >>>>>> Since we would provide a default implementation of getWindowMap using >>>>>> import org.apache.myfaces.trinidadinternal.util.SubKeyMap, we would also >>>>>> have to make SubKeyMap public as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Jakob Korherr >>>>>> >>>>>> blog: http://www.jakobk.com >>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr >>>>>> work: http://www.irian.at >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
