myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig McClanahan" <craig...@apache.org>
Subject Re: MyFaces Fusion Naming
Date Fri, 02 Mar 2007 16:40:28 GMT
On 3/2/07, Werner Punz <werner.punz@gmail.com> wrote:
> Arash Rajaeeyan schrieb:
> > and may be thats because shale has chosen a different approach?
> >
> No...
> Actually I  think the fusion conversation system is one level lower than
> shale dialog.
> While shale dialog basically follows the approach -> configuration of
> dialog scopes, have something which can keep objects in ram during
> the dialog.
>
> the fusion conversation system is along the lines of:
> providing a programmatic accessible scope mechanism based on spring 2.0s
> basic scope control which also is able
> to handle orm entity manager control, no dialog configuration whatsoever
> (except for a spring bean entry).
>
> Nothing speaks against accessing this programmatic control from a
> configuration based dialog system, and only a few things currently
> prevent it from being accessible from other webframeworks outside of the
> jsf scope.
>
> But as Mario said, who knows what the future will bring.
>
>
>

One thing I've wondered as I've watched the fusion stuff go by ... in
an architecture that is so heavily based on Spring 2 already, why
wasn't Spring Web Flow used?  It looks like the core value add you
wanted (managing the persistence tier resources at a per-conversation
level instead of per-request) could have been done with SWF just as
easily as writing your own conversation scope stuff.

Craig

Mime
View raw message