MyFaces 2 Alpha Release Maven http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/myfaces/core/myfaces-api/2.0.0-alpha/
2009/12/19 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > Also we have to update our poms for JSf2 > > 2009/12/19 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > > Just adding classes to webbeans-jsf project. >> >> For example you can add JSf2WebBeansListener etc. >> >> 2009/12/19 Sven Linstaedt <[email protected]> >> >> Was there any agreement on the JSF2 topic? As far as I remember two >>> solutions were mentioned: >>> >>> 1. Move completely to JSF2, JSF1 is not supported any more >>> 2. Create an additional project for JSF2 integration >>> >>> br, Sven >>> >>> >>> >>> 2009/12/18 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >>> >>> > +1 big one :) >>> > >>> > webbeans-impl should finally need no other dependencies than SE (maybe >>> + >>> > the servlet_spec because that would be much work to sort it out) >>> > >>> > LieGrue, >>> > strub >>> > >>> > --- Sven Linstaedt <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr, >>> > 18.12.2009: >>> > >>> > > Von: Sven Linstaedt <[email protected]> >>> > > Betreff: Re: Integration of JSF2 specific API calls >>> > > An: [email protected] >>> > > Datum: Freitag, 18. Dezember 2009, 13:38 >>> > > 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 >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > __________________________________________________ >>> > 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 > -- Gurkan Erdogdu http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
