I closed the ticket :-)

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Matthias Wessendorf<[email protected]> wrote:
> mvn jetty:run-exploded fixes that. I guess that's JSF's problem (I am
> currently using the RI)
>
> Oh boy! :)
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf<[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Mark Struberg<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> In fact we (OWB) should provide standard context implementations for JSF 
>>> annotated scopes.
>>>
>>> The whole picture:
>>>
>>> .)  JSF scanns the classpath for JSF annotations
>>>
>>> .) OWB scanns the classpath for JSR-299 annotations
>>>
>>> In fact, I assume (not having looked at the code) that MyFaces provides 
>>> kind of a mini DI container in the EL code. So any EL which will get 
>>> through to the faces EL handler will successfully resolve those scoped beans
>>>
>>> Otoh, OWB also provides an EL handler which is dominant (prior in the EL 
>>> chain). OWB currently simply ignores the javax.faces.scope annotations 
>>> since they are 'unknown' for OWB. So this very class will look like a bean 
>>> which has no annotations at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem arises latest if JSF scoped beans need to be injected into 
>>> JSR-299 beans and vice versa...
>>>
>>> an idea how to resolve this:
>>> We need to provide context implementations for the faces scopes in the 
>>> webbeans-jsf module and let OWB do all the resolving.
>>>
>>> wdyt?
>>
>> yes, that's true. It is really a PITA to have three different ways to
>> @inject stuff (in JavaEE - well the javax.faces.bean.** stuff is
>> optional)
>>
>> I am pretty sure this will actually cause lot's of pain, trouble and
>> bad blogs on JavaEE 6 (heck, deserved! :-) )
>>
>> Are you able to bring this dilemma up on some EG ?
>> (mismatch of all the stuff)
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: Re: WebBeans "eating" JSF 2.0 annotations ?
>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 5:26 PM
>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM,
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf<[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Mark Struberg<[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> for what I know (discussion on wb-dev) JSF apps
>>>> should use JSR-299 @ScopeType annotated scopes (renamed to
>>>> @NormalScope in the latest spec) and not faces scopes. I did
>>>> hope that we could unify all scopes by generally using
>>>> JSR-330 javax.inject.Scope in all EE fields. But that will
>>>> not work until JSR-299 also recognizes and treats JSR-330
>>>> scopes as normal scopes.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > WTF ? :)
>>>> >
>>>> > It is kinda odd that JSF 2.0 has should use the 299
>>>> stuff. Standalone,
>>>> > ok all fine (not tested).
>>>> > But even if there are both in the game jsf2.0 and 299,
>>>> they should
>>>> > just work (or at least I should
>>>> > get a warning that the bean is using a (good) -sorry-
>>>> incorrect... annotation.
>>>> >
>>>> > Basically this is a total mess. Annontations work
>>>> standalone, but not
>>>> > when adding some heavyweight
>>>> > stuff (like 299) to the game ? Oh boy...
>>>>
>>>> I am pretty sure that this will introcude a lot of fun to
>>>> folks
>>>> writing JSF 2.0 applications,
>>>> if your statement is true. That would worse than the JSP
>>>> 2.1
>>>> dependency (with JSF 1.2)
>>>>
>>>> I filed this bug:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-133
>>>>
>>>> At least there should be some help. Not everybody is
>>>> thrilled to
>>>> replace annotations based on
>>>> the environment (at least not me)
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > -Matthias
>>>> >
>>>> >> LieGrue,
>>>> >> strub
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>>>> >>> Subject: Re: WebBeans "eating" JSF 2.0
>>>> annotations ?
>>>> >>> To: [email protected]
>>>> >>> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 5:11 PM
>>>> >>> has no effect. The beast can't find
>>>> >>> the JSF beans.
>>>> >>> Due to lack of time, I am going with JSF 2.0
>>>> standalone.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Question is: as it was working the current
>>>> behavior is a
>>>> >>> regression,
>>>> >>> has there been any testing on OBW + JSF 2.0 ?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> -Matthias
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Gurkan
>>>> Erdogdu<[email protected]>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > It must not eat.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > But one point,
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > You still use old XML configuration file
>>>> format. As a
>>>> >>> default OWB uses new
>>>> >>> > XML format. Add
>>>> >>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openwebbeans/trunk/samples/guess/src/main/resources/META-INF/openwebbeans/openwebbeans.properties
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > in your project
>>>> resources/META-INF/openwebbeans folder
>>>> >>> and sure that all
>>>> >>> > libraries are ok.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > You can look necessary libs from
>>>> guess.war . You can
>>>> >>> create it from mvn
>>>> >>> > package -Pjetty.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > --Gurkan
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > 2009/8/26 Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >> Hi,
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> is it possible that the current trunk
>>>> is _eating_
>>>> >>> JSF 2.0 annotations ?
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> <someCode>
>>>> >>> >> ...
>>>> >>> >> import javax.faces.bean.ManagedBean;
>>>> >>> >> import
>>>> javax.faces.bean.SessionScoped;
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> @ManagedBean(name="playersBean")
>>>> >>> >> @SessionScoped
>>>> >>> >> public class ViewParamsBean
>>>> >>> >> {
>>>> >>> >> ...
>>>> >>> >> </someCode>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> In June (before reflecting the
>>>> >>> javax.enterprise.context changes) it was
>>>> >>> >> working.
>>>> >>> >> Now expressions like #{playersBean}
>>>> are simply
>>>> >>> ignored ;-)
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> Demo project is here:
>>>> >>> >> https://facesgoodies.googlecode.com/svn/CGN/trunk/
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> -Matthias
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> --
>>>> >>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > --
>>>> >>> > Gurkan Erdogdu
>>>> >>> > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> --
>>>> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> >
>>>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Reply via email to