On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Luta, Raphael (VUN) wrote:
> From: Henri Yandell <bayard <at> generationjava.com> > > > > Is this different from Tomcat and/or JSTL? If so, how? > > > > I'm clueless on portlets, but from my 'vague consumer' view, I thought > > the JSR was standardising a lot of what Jetspeed does. > > > > A portlet is both different from a servlet and from a taglib. Sorry. I'm being mis-understood. How is this Ref-implementation different than the situation in which Tomcat and JSTL were reference implementations of JSRs. If it has a substantial difference, ie) no code yet, or no apache developers on the JSR, then I think those differences make a big point as to whether to support the RI of the JSR. > > Are there any Jetspeed people on this JSR? Or is it a competing viewpoint? > > [much like the Log JSR suddenly wanting to turn Log4j into their > > reference]. Would Jetspeed use Charon/Pluto, or would the fact that it's > > an RI limit Jetspeed? > > > > Pluto and Jetspeed would have a slightly different scope: > - Pluto would be the RI for the JSR 168 API, just like Tomcat is the RI for > the Servlet API > - Jetspeed would a portal implementation embedding pluto, focussing on > building a full-featured portal environment (with things like > customization > implementation, portal page definition, user preference persistence, > etc...) > + a set of default portlets. Okay. So Jetspeed would be limiting itself and maybe not being able to add new features in the JSR area. As in, Tomcat have 'feature' requests which they have to turn down as they aren't in the spec. Same thing for Jakarta Standard Taglib, there are some tag features which can't be done. Hen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
