Hmmm... Not making my decision any easier but thx for your inputs... :) Guess I have to just make myself a little webapp trying to use RF also and see how it goes....
BTJ On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:54:49 -0200 Walter Mourão <[email protected]> wrote: > I´ve worked six months using Richfaces. > In my new project I choose Trinidad because: > - Richfaces was buggy > - Poor support > - Lack of components, dialogs and "flowpagescope". > > Of course it should be more mature now. > > I had the experience of encapsulating javascript components and using DWR > and ajaxtags to get Ajax working. > > I prefer Trinidad. > > Walter Mourão > http://waltermourao.com.br > http://arcadian.com.br > http://oriens.com.br > > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Stephen Friedrich > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Uh, oh, a controversial topic. > > I have used Trinidad quite a lot and I have started a project using > > RichFaces a couple of weeks ago. > > Here are a couple of points that caused me to try something new: > > > > Pro RichFaces: > > - documentation: RichFaces docs are _much_ better and more complete (if > > sometimes a little hard to read, > > because it seems to be written by a non-native speaker). > > - less bugs (my personal impression) > > - more powerful AJAX options (e.g. configurable queues, very useful > > "ajaxSingle" option which processes > > just a single component in the JSF request lifecycle) > > - more complete component set > > > > Contra Trinidad: > > - I have the impression that interoperability and openness isn't high on > > the list of goals for Trinidad > > It still seems to be designed with the JDeveloper GUI Designer in mind. > > - Pace of development: It took _ages_ to make the transition from the first > > ADF Faces drop at Apache > > to the first Trinidad release. > > An enhanced version of Trinidad is in the make at Oracle and Oracle > > intends to donate it to Apache, too. > > Based on experience I would estimate an arrival in 2010 or 2011. > > > > A more general lessons learned for me was to not rely on component sets if > > it is not necessary. > > Often times it is just as easy to create a facelets composition component > > yourself and you'll be able to > > adjust the code/layout/style/interaction patterns to your needs much more > > easily. > > It is also quite easy to wrap existing JavaScript controls. For example > > creating a facelets component > > that uses/wraps a widget from jQuery UI. > > > > > > > > Bjørn T Johansen wrote: > > > >> I am starting developing a new webapp and started looking at Trinidad and > >> it looks like a good thing to use.. Then a > >> friend told me I had to look at RichFaces and it also looks quite good... > >> Which one do I choose? What is their pros and > >> cons? (I haven't used either before...) > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> BTJ > >> > >>
