On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>At the time OWB picks up the extension, we will try to add the > javax.faces.bean.ViewScoped.class and the corresponding Context to the > BeanManager >>>-> kawumms, because the ViewScoped.class is not available in > JSF-1.2 > Maybe I did not explain it better, but OWB uses JSF2 not JSF 1.2. Look at > "trunk/pom.xml" and "webbeans-jsf/pom.xml". So, there is no such a think > that "it uses JSF2 but OWB does not support it". OWB uses JSF2 API not JSF > 1.2 or earlier. But we can still support OWB with JSF 1.2 runtimes. For > example, we can add some property to "openwebbeans.properties" like > > use.JSF2.extensions = true/false (default true) > > If developer wants to use OWB with JSF 1.2, it defines > openwebbeans.properties file with "use.JSF2.extensions=false", so we can > disable JSF2 extensions in JSF 1.2 environments. > >>>>What about introducing an own 'extensions' module for parts which are not > OWB specific but would also work on other containers? > +1, but this can be delayed. And it requires a bit thinking :) > >>>>webbeans-extensions >>>> +- cdi-jsf2 >>>>> | +- cdi-jsf2-api (contains e.g. a new @FlashScoped annotation) >>>> | +- cdi-jsf2-impl (contains extensions for @ViewScoped + @FlashScoped) >>>> +- cdi-another > > I really hate this! We are not implementing JSF2 specs, APIs etc. This is > provided by the JSF2 implementations.
well, he didn't say that this package contains the full JSF API... > > Therefore my comment on JSF extensions is that; > * Write JSF extensions in webbeans-jsf package for the time being. Use > properties scenario (I explained) to disable this extension in JSF 1.2 > environments. > > Thanks; > > --Gurkan > > 2010/1/12 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >> in theory yes, in praxis no ;) >> >> At the time OWB picks up the extension, we will try to add the >> javax.faces.bean.ViewScoped.class and the corresponding Context to the >> BeanManager -> kawumms, because the ViewScoped.class is not available in >> JSF-1.2 >> >> Thus, I really hesitate to check it in :( >> >> I also already thought about adding a webbeans-extensions module (copying >> over from my currently composing mail): >> >> What about introducing an own 'extensions' module for parts which are not >> OWB specific but would also work on other containers? >> >> I have the following structure in mind: >> >> webbeans-extensions >> +- cdi-jsf2 >> | +- cdi-jsf2-api (contains e.g. a new @FlashScoped annotation) >> | +- cdi-jsf2-impl (contains extensions for @ViewScoped + @FlashScoped) >> +- cdi-another >> >> Otoh, this interferes with seam3 which will also contain such an extension. >> And there is currently no way to disable 'parts' of an extension. The way to >> go is imho to introduce some properties to 'disable' parts of the >> functionality of an extension manually. >> >> After talking with Nik and Pete on IRC, I'm pretty sure that we need to do >> this extensions, because Seam3 is still LGPL and so we wouldn't be able to >> provide this functionality for Geronimo or MyFaces if needed some days. >> And supporting @ViewScoped via CDI may be part of the next JSF spec?... >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> --- On Tue, 1/12/10, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > From: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> >> > Subject: Re: fully going JSF2? >> > To: [email protected] >> > Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2010, 12:46 PM >> > >>>This also has the side >> > effect that we now for the first time really use >> > JSF2 functionality, and thus it would not be possible to >> > use OWB with JSF-1 >> > >>>applications anymore >> > >> > Actually this is not correct observation. OWB does not >> > depend on any JSF >> > specific implementations. And you know that core OWB does >> > not require any >> > JSF library (Plugin model). You can use OWB with/without >> > JSF. >> > >> > From JSF Perspective >> > ---------------------------------------- >> > Currently we are providing CDI Conversation Context via our >> > "webbeans-jsf" >> > module. This module has a dependency on "MyFaces >> > 2.0.0-alpha API" as an >> > optional because JSF libraries are provided at runtime via >> > containers/developers. As you see, even webbeans-jsf module >> > does not depend >> > on any JSF implementation or specific JSF 1.2/2.0 API etc. >> > Therefore we can >> > put any JSF 1.2/2.0 related code here, because this module >> > uses 2.0 API and >> > 2.0 API is backward compatible with 1.2 API (Means that 1.2 >> > APIs are >> > contained in 2.0 API). If anyone would like to use our JSF >> > 2.0 functionality >> > (like ViewScoped), then he requires to add JSF 2.0 >> > implementation libraries >> > into his application class path. >> > >> > In summary, OWB is not related with JSF implementations. It >> > uses JSF2 API, >> > that is all. If anyone wants to use our JSF2 funtions, he >> > has to provide >> > runtime JSF2 libraries. >> > >> > For example, some JSF samples are currently run with JSF >> > 2.0 libraries while >> > some of them uses JSF 1.2 libraries. Both of them uses >> > webbeans-impl and >> > webbeans-jsf modules. >> > >> > From Extensions Perspective >> > ------------------------------------------- >> > But, it is reasonable for me that we can define >> > "webbeans-extensions" module >> > that is independent from CDI implementations. But I am not >> > sure, whether ot >> > not this module depend on any OWB specific code! >> > >> > >> > Thanks; >> > >> > --Gurkan >> > >> > >> > >> > 2010/1/12 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> > >> > > Hi! >> > > >> > > I have coded the javax.faces.bean.ViewScoped handling >> > and it turned out >> > > that I do not need anything OWB special. So this i a >> > completely CDI >> > > independent portable implementation, and as such I'm >> > in favour to _not_ add >> > > it to openwebbeans-jsf but to a new 'extensions' >> > module. >> > > >> > > This also has the side effect that we now for the >> > first time really use >> > > JSF2 functionality, and thus it would not be possible >> > to use OWB with JSF-1 >> > > applications anymore! But since I consider OWB + JSF-1 >> > a very important >> > > scenario (for making migration easier and due to the >> > fact that there is >> > > still no JSF-2 component taglib on the market!), I >> > don't like to add this to >> > > openwebbeans-jsf. >> > > >> > > This opens the general question on how we cope with >> > JSF-1 vs JSF-2 in the >> > > future. >> > > >> > > LieGrue, >> > > strub >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Gurkan Erdogdu >> > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com >> > >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Gurkan Erdogdu > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
