What I mean is that, Our code base has nothing regarding to JSF 1.2 like other JSF Frameworks/Tools etc. do.
We have just implemented 2 class for conversation service 1* WebBeansPhase Listener --> For restore conversations 2* Custom View Handler --> For adding cid to view handler Both of them work on any JSF1.2 or JSF2 implementation. Therefore it is not rational to define new jsf2 project from my point of view. If we were implementing lots of code unique to JSF 1.2 then it will be reasonable to define new JSF2 project but we did not. Actually it is meaningless for me to separate JSF 1.2 and JSF 2. We must not think of such a backward compatibility with JSF 1.2 etc because we have been implementing Java EE 6 defined JSR-299 specification. --Gurkan 2009/12/17 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Gurkan, > > I was not talking about special products, I also meant the API and I > mentioned RichFaces-3.3.2 only as an example. You can google for the > incompatibility problems. > > Matter of fact: > .) EE6 WebProfile defines JSF-2, so from this point I'm with you > > But: > .) there is no full stack for JSF-2 on the market currently (the component > libraries are missing, since they are mostly incompatible) > Plus, there will be lot old projects which still use JSF-1.2 but may like > to use OWB for new extensions. > > and as such: > .) providing an easy migration path to EE6 by allowing to use JSF-1.2 + OWB > would imho be a pretty nice goodie. > > I don't think it will confuse users if they have a choice between a JSF-1.2 > and a JSF-2 plugin if we explain the differences in the documentation. > I think we will start hacking on the feature and if we hit the point of no > return we should create an own module. > > > wdyt? > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> schrieb am Do, 17.12.2009: > > > Von: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > > Betreff: Re: Integration of JSF2 specific API calls > > An: [email protected] > > Datum: Donnerstag, 17. Dezember 2009, 10:03 > > Hey Mark, > > > > >>E.g. try running RichFaces-3.3.2 on a JSF-2 > > container ;) > > Java EE standards do not depend on any special product! > > Standards talk about > > API. > > > > >>In JSF-1.2 there was no standardised ajax handling, > > so we would have no > > chance to use those features in a portable fashion. > > JSR-299 is contained in Java EE 6. Java EE 6 defines JSF2 > > and when we talk > > about JSF functionality, it means JSF2 not JSF1.2 or > > earlier. > > We wrote a little JSF code for conversations and at that > > time there was no > > offical MyFaces JSF2 API to use. Now there is one and we > > will update our pom > > to use MyFaces JSF2 and we will go ahead with it. In fact, > > our codes in > > webbeans-jsf must work within JSF2. Moreover, JSF2 is > > compatible with JSF1.2 > > as written in Java EE 6 specification. > > > > So all functionality must go into package webbeans-jsf. > > There is no need to > > create extra project modules that confuses developers > > minds. > > > > Thnks; > > > > --Gurkan > > > > 2009/12/17 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > > > > > > JSF2 is backward compatible > > > > > > Not when it comes to the details! > > > E.g. try running RichFaces-3.3.2 on a JSF-2 container > > ;) > > > > > > There have been a few changes which allows us to > > create better support for > > > JSF2, mostly in the AJAX area. In JSF-1.2 there was no > > standardised ajax > > > handling, so we would have no chance to use those > > features in a portable > > > fashion. > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > --- Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > > schrieb am Do, 17.12.2009: > > > > > > > Von: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > > > > Betreff: Re: Integration of JSF2 specific API > > calls > > > > An: [email protected] > > > > Datum: Donnerstag, 17. Dezember 2009, 9:50 > > > > >>>Id favour a > > > > webbeans-jsf2, I think that's more future proof. > > > > I think that there is no need to define extra > > jsf > > > > module/project. There is > > > > no such a thing that "You could use it in JSF > > 1.2 but > > > > not JSF2 or vice > > > > versa". We support JSF2 and JSF2 is backward > > compatible. > > > > But, if we really > > > > emphasize that the code is related with "JSF2", > > we can > > > > create a package with > > > > named "jsf2" in webbeans-jsf project. > > > > > > > > Thanks; > > > > > > > > --Gurkan > > > > > > > > 2009/12/17 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > cool! > > > > > > > > > > Id favour a webbeans-jsf2, I think that's > > more future > > > > proof. > > > > > > > > > > And as Gurkan already said: please attach > > the patch as > > > > owb-171-patch.rfc in > > > > > Jira. > > > > > > > > > > txs and LieGrue, > > > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > --- Sven Linstaedt <[email protected]> > > > > schrieb am Do, > > > > > 17.12.2009: > > > > > > > > > > > Von: Sven Linstaedt <[email protected]> > > > > > > Betreff: Integration of JSF2 specific > > API calls > > > > > > An: [email protected] > > > > > > Datum: Donnerstag, 17. Dezember 2009, > > 2:24 > > > > > > Back in business. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am currently working on a patch for > > OWB-171. > > > > Besides some > > > > > > cleanups I have refactored the code: > > > > > > > > > > > > Conversation is request scoped and > > solely created > > > > or > > > > > > restored by ConversationBean which > > delegates the > > > > later one > > > > > > to the ConversationManager. > > WebBeansPhaseListener > > > > is only > > > > > > responsible for retrieving and handling > > the > > > > > > ConversationContext. Conversation is > > only > > > > restored using the > > > > > > "cid" request parameter and not the > > > > > > UIViewRoot's attributes, because the > > view is > > > > only > > > > > > accessible after restore view phase. > > The > > > > restored > > > > > > conversation (and it's context of > > course) must > > > > actually > > > > > > exist for restoring the view. This > > chicken or egg > > > > problem > > > > > > was the reason not to store the the cid > > in the > > > > view's > > > > > > attributes, because restoring these > > attributes > > > > actually > > > > > > needs restoring the conversation > > beforehand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is still an issue with the > > jsf2-example: In > > > > case of > > > > > > ajax requests which start a long > > running > > > > conversation, all > > > > > > form's action attributes needs to be > > updated to > > > > reflect > > > > > > the current active conversation for > > following > > > > request. This > > > > > > could be done using JSF2 specific API > > features. > > > > At the > > > > > > moment webbeans-impl is purely compiled > > against > > > > the JSF 1.2 > > > > > > API. Without the necessary abstraction > > there is > > > > no chance to > > > > > > get the JSF2 specific ajax > > functionality working > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have attached the patch to this mail > > and not to > > > > the > > > > > > issue, because the patch is not meant > > for > > > > inclusion yet, but > > > > > > for testing purposes. Integration it > > and > > > > rerunning the > > > > > > jsf2-example points out my problem. If > > you > > > > disable ajax by > > > > > > disabling javascript in your browser > > e.g. the > > > > conversation > > > > > > example is working, because in this > > case the full > > > > page with > > > > > > updated form's action urls is rendered > > during > > > > each > > > > > > action invocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Last but not least: Do you guys have a > > glue how > > > > JSF2 > > > > > > specific extension for conversation > > handling > > > > should be > > > > > > integrated? I supose either adding > > another > > > > project > > > > > > (webbeans-jsf2 e.g.) or updating the > > JSF API (not > > > > impl) > > > > > > version to 2.x and making sure, we are > > loading > > > > JSF2 specific > > > > > > classes only for this ajax purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good night, Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt > > über einen > > > > herausragenden Schutz > > > > > gegen Massenmails. > > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Gurkan Erdogdu > > > > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen > > herausragenden Schutz > > > gegen Massenmails. > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Gurkan Erdogdu > > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz > gegen Massenmails. > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- Gurkan Erdogdu http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
