I also thought about migrating all JSF compile time depend classes from webbeans-impl to webbeans-jsf for a clearer seperation. wdyt?
br, Sven 2009/12/17 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Yes we can start that way. > > But having 2 modules would have the benefit that we can define the > corresponding dependencies and thus make sure that we do not use 'newer' > features at compile time. > > 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, 10:49 > > >>>I think we will start > > hacking on the feature and if we hit the point of > > no return we should create an own module. > > We could definitely create a new package for unique JSF2 > > features if we will > > have under webbeans-jsf project. So management and > > configuration are much > > more easy with having one JSF module. > > > > > > 2009/12/17 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 >
