De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > What are the target plans for 2.0, specifically related to > the support for > JSR168 (Portlet API)?
Hmmm... this is a touch one. We want to have JS 2.0 implement the JSR 168 API but unfortunately, this API keeps being pushed back for public review and before the public review, we can't work on a public open-source implementation because of the JCP NDA conditions even though David is a member of the JCP and Apache group is active in defining this API... > We'd like to build portlets to run on JetSpeed, IBM WebSphere > Portal (WSP) > and other platforms (IBM has extended the Portlet API and the portlet > framework to subclass off of the servlet API). > What approach would you recommend to "build in" some amount > of support when > building portlets to maximize portability? > The way I see it, Portlet APIs won't be standardized with enough reference implementations available before at 1 year. The JSR API won't be the IBM one whatever its technical merits because the other vendors won't let IBM get such a competitive advantage but you can expect it to be much closer to the WSP one than the current Jetspeed one (we all agree on it actually...). Since cross-platform portlets with a common deployment model is currently out, I'd advise you to rely on a platform-independant interface (SOAP for example) and portal-engine specific adapatation portlets to invoke your business code. Targetting the current public WSRP draft mayu be a good bet since you'll notice there's a significant intersection between the members of the OASIS WSRP group and the JSR 168 group ;> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsrp/documents/wsia_wsrp_interface_spec _v0.85.pdf If you do this and develop a WSRP adaptation portlet for Jetspeed, we'll gladly accept the contribution :) -- Rapha�l Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jakarta Jetspeed - Enterprise Portal in Java http://jakarta.apache.org/jetspeed/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
