Re: Shale vs JBoss Seam
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-05-2006/jw-0515-jsf.html Niall On 9/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Shale Group, Could some body explain me the difference between the Shale & JBOSS Seam framework. if both are not trying to solve the same problem, is thare anyway we could use both for same project? Regards, Mohan
[OT] Shale and Cat incompatibility [was Re: stack traces from shale-clay-usecases]
On 2/3/07, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ignore the previous empty response -- that's what you get when you pet a cat who is pawing your mouse at that moment :-). LOL - my cat sometimes walks accross my keyboard, fortunately no strange messages have resulted to date, but its going to happen one day! Niall Craig
Re: Shale Tiger Extensions with Tomcat 5.5.23
On 6/26/07, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/26/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i think that particular tomcat has issues with reading listeners That was definitely the case in earlier 5.5 versions ... it's disappointing if they still haven't fixed it. Theres an on going vote on Tomcat 5.5.24 - might be worth seeing if its resolve in that version: http://tinyurl.com/23f4ku Niall Craig > > > > On 6/26/07, Vivian Steller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm trying to run Shale Tiger extensions with tomcat 5.5.23 using > > java 5 sdk. however it does not work, tomcat does not recognize my > > pojos annotated as shale beans. using tomcat 6.0.13 it all works > > fine. Thus I think my setup is right (I have faces-config in WEB-INF, > > and the shale-tiger-1.0.4.jar in WEB-INF/lib as well as the shale- > > core and shale-view libs). > > > > Any known issues with tomcat 5.5.23? btw. I want to use servlet 2.4., > > jsp 2.0 as they are bundled with tomcat 5.5. this should not be a > > problem or? > > > > Thanks for any comments. > > With best regards, > > > > Vivian > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org >
Re: Using shale-test with ValueBinding lists
On 10/16/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From: Iain Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Hi Gary,
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the information! Do you know if the mock implementation
> > is going to be extended at any point to include dealing with lists
> > reference by expressions like "#{myBean.myList[0]}"?
> >
>
> I'm not sure. The test framework is one of the best parts of Shale but the
> only problem I see in expanding for more EL support is that it becomes more
> and more complicated. It's easy to draw the line with the existing mock
> implementation.
>
> At one time I added a fix to support scopes like
> "#{requestScope['xxx.xxx.xx']}" and Craig made a similar comment about
> keeping the mock implementation simple.
>
> However, Shale is used by many of the myfaces projects. I think the
> community should make the decision providing there is a volunteer to
> contribute.
>
I don't know how Shale Test Framework supports EL - but with the new
"Unified EL" spec, which is independant of servlet/jsf it might be an
idea to plug that into the test framework. Apache Tomcat has released
separate jars which are now available in the maven repo.
Niall
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Iain
> >
>
>
> Gary
>
>
> > ___
> > Iain Duncan
> > MDM Platform Services Development
> > IBM UK Limited
> > MP 188, Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants, SO21 2JN, UK
> > t: +44 (0)1962 816873 / Internal : 7-246873
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary VanMatre)
> > 16/10/2007 16:27
> > Please respond to
> > user@shale.apache.org
> >
> >
> > To
> > user@shale.apache.org
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > Re: Using shale-test with ValueBinding lists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Iain Duncan
> > >
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > > I've just started using shale-test to test an application using JSF1.1
> > so
> > > apologies if this is a dumb question and I am doing something obvious
> > > wrong! I have been unable to get the getValue() method on a ValueBinding
> >
> > > that involves a list to work. Does anyone know if this has been
> > > implemented?
> > >
> >
> > Simple expressions can be evaluated. The mock implementation tokenizes
> > the expression based on the "dot" separator. So, you can evaluate
> > expressions like "#{mybean.property}".
> >
> > You have to programmatically add your beans into scope in your unit tests
> > or add a few lines of logic to process faces-config's.
> >
> >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Iain
> > >
> >
> > Gary
Re: Using shale-test with ValueBinding lists
On 10/17/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From: "Niall Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > On 10/16/07, Gary VanMatre wrote:
> > > >From: Iain Duncan
> > > >
> > > > Hi Gary,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot for the information! Do you know if the mock implementation
> > > > is going to be extended at any point to include dealing with lists
> > > > reference by expressions like "#{myBean.myList[0]}"?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure. The test framework is one of the best parts of Shale but the
> > only problem I see in expanding for more EL support is that it becomes more
> > and
> > more complicated. It's easy to draw the line with the existing mock
> > implementation.
> > >
> > > At one time I added a fix to support scopes like
> > "#{requestScope['xxx.xxx.xx']}" and Craig made a similar comment about
> > keeping
> > the mock implementation simple.
> > >
> > > However, Shale is used by many of the myfaces projects. I think the
> > > community
> > should make the decision providing there is a volunteer to contribute.
> > >
> >
> > I don't know how Shale Test Framework supports EL - but with the new
> > "Unified EL" spec, which is independant of servlet/jsf it might be an
> > idea to plug that into the test framework. Apache Tomcat has released
> > separate jars which are now available in the maven repo.
> >
>
> That sounds like something we should look into. I'm not sure how coupled it
> is with JSP but would be better than building up a mock implementation.
Its not coupled at all - the problem was that jsf and jsp had
different el flavours - the unfied EL was decoupled from JSP and
released as a separate spec. The reason its been labelled "unified"
was because its underpinned the next (can't remember version numbers)
releases of both JSP and JSF:
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/reference/techart/unifiedEL.html
Niall
> > Niall
> >
>
>
> Gary
>
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Iain
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Iain Duncan
> > > > MDM Platform Services Development
> > > > IBM UK Limited
> > > > MP 188, Hursley Park, Winchester, Hants, SO21 2JN, UK
> > > > t: +44 (0)1962 816873 / Internal : 7-246873
> > > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary VanMatre)
> > > > 16/10/2007 16:27
> > > > Please respond to
> > > > user@shale.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To
> > > > user@shale.apache.org
> > > > cc
> > > >
> > > > Subject
> > > > Re: Using shale-test with ValueBinding lists
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: Iain Duncan
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello All,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've just started using shale-test to test an application using JSF1.1
> > > > so
> > > > > apologies if this is a dumb question and I am doing something obvious
> > > > > wrong! I have been unable to get the getValue() method on a
> > > > > ValueBinding
> > > >
> > > > > that involves a list to work. Does anyone know if this has been
> > > > > implemented?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Simple expressions can be evaluated. The mock implementation tokenizes
> > > > the expression based on the "dot" separator. So, you can evaluate
> > > > expressions like "#{mybean.property}".
> > > >
> > > > You have to programmatically add your beans into scope in your unit
> > > > tests
> > > > or add a few lines of logic to process faces-config's.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Iain
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gary
Re: Shale Roadmap
On Feb 6, 2008 7:21 PM, linux.eavilesa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been tracking user and development mailing lists during some time, > and I think that people is getting (including me) a little bit nervous > about Shale project. and rightly so - the trends are stark: Overall: http://shale.markmail.org/search/?q= Dev: http://tinyurl.com/2d3e92 Commits: http://tinyurl.com/2synvm Unless those trends start to reverse, the only glimmer of hope on the horizon is/was the proposal to move the code to MyFaces. Niall > I think that the main reason why is the fact that there is not a well > defined road map now for the project and many of as have bitten to use > Shale in front of other frameworks. > > First of all decide if Shale has a future (that I think that it does) > and redefine or reinforce the project goal. > > So in my opinion we should focus on defining or determining three key > concepts: > · Define the project team organization, mainly the project leader and > the development team. > · Determine the release of the stable version (date and who will lead it) > · Analyze each module and decide which must eliminated and which is > worth keeping alive > > You will say > > Thanks for your time. > > Esteve > >
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Shale PMC Chair
Congratulations Gary :) Niall On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In its meeting yesterday the Apache Board of Directors unanimously > approved a resolution naming Gary VanMatre the new chair of the Apache > Shale Project Management Committee. Please join us in congratulating > Gary for this new role. > > In addition we would like to publicly thank Craig McClanahan for his > service to this project and his invaluable contribution to the Java > web application development community. We are endlessly grateful to > him for his role in defining the JavaServer Faces framework and, more > specifically, in birthing the Shale project. It is no small loss to > this community that his work has made it difficult for him to be as > involved as he once was. At his own request, Craig is now an emeritus > member of the Shale PMC. > > Thank you, > Greg Reddin > Apache Shale PMC Member >
