Yes, we all know the improvements JSF 1.2 has to offer, and all committers want to have a JSF 1.2 compliant version out as soon as possible.
If you can help us make it possible to rely on Sun's CDDL licensed code, we'll have a chance to actually work on it. regards, Martin On 1/14/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/13/06, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 14:01 -0500, Balunas, Jay wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I have been lurking for some time, and have been investigating JSF for a > new project at my company. Please forgive me is this has come up already - > I did search through several pages of archives and could not find a > reference to 1.2 support roadmaps > > > > > > Because this will be a new project starting in about a month, and first > release around end of summer (August -September) I have been investigating > both the current 1.1.1 version of myFaces, and looking into what 1.2 JSF > provides. We are planning on using Ajax and from what research I have done > JSF 1.2 has some hooks for making Ajax requests less of a hack into the life > cycle. > > > > > > We are also investigating Suns implementation, but I would prefer to > stick with myFaces as the support and community seems stronger. > > > > Note that all the following is not "official"; I'm a myfaces committer, > > but not part of the project management committee. This info is just my > > view from what I observe happening... > > > > Firstly, the JSF 1.2 spec is not yet released; it's at "proposed final > > draft", and has been for many months. > > Indeed, no one can actually "release" a "General Availability" > implementation of a JCP spec that is not final yet. But that doesn't stop > you from working on such an implementation, on the assumption that it will > eventually go final (since JSF 1.2 is part of JavaEE 5, I think that's a > pretty good bet :-). > > > I doubt very much if MyFaces will manage to release a 1.2-compatible > > version in the next six months. Sun have made JSF 1.2 dependent on a new > > version of the EL "expression language" library, and on a new version of > > JSP. Until those exist MyFaces can't even begin to implement much of JSF > > 1.2. > > > > And I'm not aware of any progress on implementing the next JSP version > > by Apache Tomcat or other such projects. As far as I am aware, Sun is > > the only one with an implementation of this near completion. That would, > > in fact, prevent the official release of the spec for many > > organisations; it's common to require at least 2 successful > > implementations of a spec before it is considered ready for release. I'm > > not sure that Sun works by those rules though. > > > > MyFaces is intending to add some JSF1.2 type features into the current > > 1.1-compatible release. Encrypted client-side sessions are already done > > for example. > > > > In addition, there is still a lot of work to be done to stabilise the > > current 1.1-compatible release. I personally would like to see effort > > put into this before moving on to the next spec version. > > One option for the MyFaces community to consider, with regards to JSF 1.2, > is to utilize some portions of the JSF 1.2 reference implementation, which > (unlike the JSF 1.1 RI) is under the CDDL license. The implementation of > the new EL APIs seems like an obvious candidate for this. In turn, though, > this would require pushing on Apache to accept dependencies on CDDL-licensed > code -- from my conversation with insiders, there seems to be no conceptual > problem with CDDL's terms; it's caught up in a larger strategic initiative > on dealing with non-Apache-licensed software. If the MyFaces community > wants to, this would be an obvious case where it would benefit the world. > I'd happily go advocate that scenario, if the MyFaces community felt that > this was the right direction to go. > > It isn't by any means required that such a dependency last forever -- if it > makes sense to create your own implementation, that's perfectly fine. > Consider using the RI code a short term strategy to get a release out the > door more quickly than would otherwise be possible. If the code works, and > does everything you need, then no harm in relying on it. If it doesn't, > replace it -- that's what open source is about. > > But I need to reiterate a comment above, because it is not obvious to me > that the MyFaces development community has figured out all the implications > yet: > > * JSF 1.2 will be (when it is released -- trust me, that is not a long time > away :-) a *required* > API to be supported by any Java EE 5 server. > > * That means, any app server vendor who is planning on implementing Java EE > 5 is going > to need to make a JSF technology choice sooner, rather than later. > > * At the moment, there is only one viable JSF 1.2 implementation that I am > aware of. > In the absence of any other choice, this will become the default > selection. > > * Specific use cases -- if/when Geronimo and JBoss decide to implement Java > EE 5, > they are going to require a JSF 1.2 implementation. > > * Is the MyFaces community interested in being an option for app server > vendors? If so, > it's time to move quickly. Once a particular app server chooses a > particular implementation > of a particular dependency, it's generally pretty difficult to affect that > choice later. > > * If MyFaces is satisfied being a JSF 1.1 implementation, for non-JavaEE5 > environments, > then none of the above matters. ((In my personal opinion, that would be a > poor choice, > but it is not my choice to make.)) > > If I were a MyFaces committer (and I'd certainly enjoy being one, but my > personal interest is more in the components than in the JSF implementation), > I would seriously think about the strategic issues around the > when-and-if-supporting-JSF-1.2 question. I would also view a decision to > defer paying attention to JSF 1.2 with sadness ... as someone interested in > dealing with many of the issues that JSF 1.0/1.1 + JSP brings to the table, > I would sure like there to be more people (rather than less) that take > advantage of the JSF 1.2 improvements in this area -- and they are > *substantial*. To say nothing of everything else that is improved in 1.2 > ... > > > Regards, > > > > Simon > > > > > > Craig > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
