> It still amazes me that there is no regular mailing list for JSF. I hate > those forum approaches. Email is so much more conveinient.
+1 on that one > True, but had you not been diligent enough to look elsewhere (MyFaces) > you mention you might have given up. I was in the same boat. JSF might > lose some good people that just don't have the time or energy to look > elsewhere. Agreed. I think this would apply most to issues where there are significant shortcomings. For me, the javascript problem was very significant shortcoming (the rest of my team was recommending we drop faces investigation until it was resolved in the spec.) Major issues should be addressed as quickly as possible by the JCP. I think they are doing their best to resolve them. Of course what consistutes a major issue is also open for debate. I'm increasingly coming to view JSF as really just another building block for a framework. Just as Struts (and other frameworks like it) are built on JSP and Servlet. JSF is a great starting point upon which you can build more sophisticated frameworks. If everyone moves in this direction, that would be a good thing. Now we would all have JSF in common as well as JSP and Servlets. That would make it easier to switch from one framework to another because at least you have a common starting point. (Plus stuff from one framework should be more usable in another.) Craig seems to be taking this approach with Shale. Recognizing that JSF doesn't do everything he is building more on top of it. He also has made a point about how there is no need to reinvent the stuff that JSF manages to take care of for you. I think that is the key to how we as developers should move forward. Embrace JSF and move on. I probably shouldn't speak too much for Craig or Shale though. I still haven't had time to get into the details of his proposal (I am still working on mastering JSF first.) > Rick sean
