>>>well, he didn't say that this package contains the full JSF API...
I mean that any subset of JSF API. 2010/1/12 Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]> > 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 > -- Gurkan Erdogdu http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
