myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hazem Saleh <haz...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Trinidad][api]TRINIDAD-1857 Add a Map associated with each window or tab that the user is interacting with
Date Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:16:26 GMT
-1 for having a duplicate functionality.
+1 for using CODI for the @WidnowScoped.

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi blake,
>
> @trinidad window map & cdi:
> we are just interested in some special events like a page-refresh
> (triggered by the user).
> everything else is handled internally. -> (currently) i don't see a reason
> for using such an external map.
>
> @stand-alone trinidad window map:
> do you mean there are some internal project guidelines like:
>  the project has to use plain trinidad.
> ?
>
> @page flow scope:
> that's a similar story - besides @WindowScoped codi provides
> @ConversationScoped (similar to the conversations of orchestra) as well as
> @ViewAccessScoped (similar to the access scope of orchestra).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
>
> 2010/7/21 Blake Sullivan <blake.sullivan@oracle.com>
>
>>
>> On Jul 21, 2010, at 5:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>>
>> hi mark,
>>
>> nobody said that it would harm (at least i'm not aware of technical
>> issues).
>> (maybe some people would use it even though they shouldn't - e.g. because
>> they have an alternative which should be used in their application/s.)
>> furthermore, i agree with martin - most projects are using (or will use)
>> one of the mentioned frameworks.
>>
>> the questions are:
>> who would use this feature?
>>
>> Anyone who needed to store information on a per window basis and could
>> live without managed bean support.  We already had several teams trying to
>> build this on their own.  The finer-grained scopes, such as page flow scope,
>> should be built on top of this directly. As teams have been dealing with
>> fail-over issues, they are finding that they want this.
>>
>>  - new projects? i don't think so.
>>
>> If they had the above issues, sure.
>>
>>   - existing projects? would they upgrade to a new version of trinidad
>> just for using this feature?
>>
>> I don't understand.  If the bar for new features is that they must be the
>> driving force for customers to upgrade, very few features would be added to
>> any project.
>>
>> -- Blake Sullivan
>>
>>
>> maybe it's the right time to discuss our plans for the future of trinidad.
>> (at least if we should use the maven shade plugin for modularizing trinidad.
>> in such a case we could also provide an all-in-one package via special
>> modules. so users won't see any difference, if they prefer the existing
>> monolithic package.)
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>> http://www.irian.at
>>
>> Your JSF powerhouse -
>> JSF Consulting, Development and
>> Courses in English and German
>>
>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>>
>>
>> 2010/7/21 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
>>
>>> Hmm difficult topic.
>>>
>>> Please allow me a few questions:
>>>
>>> a.) Trinidad components would still work with using either Orchestra
>>> conversations or CODI?
>>> b) You are not relying on other components or the users using your
>>> conversation
>>> stuff if they don't like?
>>> c) if the user doesn't make use of this feature, it will not pollute the
>>> viewRoot or cause heavy performance hits?
>>>
>>> If all this is ok, then there is imo no argument against adding it to
>>> Trinidad.
>>> This doesn't mean I like it either, but it doesn't hurt at least ;)
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
>>> >To: MyFaces Development <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
>>> >Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 10:16:23 AM
>>> >Subject: Re: [Trinidad][api]TRINIDAD-1857 Add a Map associated with each
>>>  window
>>> >
>>> >or tab that the user is interacting with
>>> >
>>> >i agree with martin.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >regards,
>>> >gerhard
>>> >
>>> >http://www.irian.at
>>> >
>>> >Your JSF powerhouse -
>>> >JSF Consulting, Development and
>>> >Courses in English and German
>>> >
>>> >Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >2010/7/21 Martin Marinschek <mmarinschek@apache.org>
>>> >
>>> >Hi Matthias,
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> Not everybody is using CDI and/or Spring.
>>> >>
>>> >>well, in the real world and a little while in the future, there is not
>>> >>many people who will not have one of these frameworks in their
>>> >>applications.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> I think, on long term we may want one clean and independent API,
>>> where
>>> >>> all these projects offer an implementation for a window/event system:
>>> >>> -CODI
>>> >>> -Orchestra
>>> >>> -Trinidad
>>> >>> -etc
>>> >>>
>>> >>> However, right now, Trinidad has the base already and adding a new
>>> >>> toolset to the belt feels kinda wrong.
>>> >>> Again +1 on this to be inside of Trinidad.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> This does not mean that we could work on a better future version
of a
>>> >>> more unified API, for this. Right?
>>> >>
>>> >>yes, this is what we could and what we should. Why not take this
>>> >>addition as a reason to do this right now? If we donĀ“t take such
>>> >>additions as a reason to do this, what else will be our reason?
>>> >>
>>> >>best regards,
>>> >>
>>> >>Martin
>>> >>
>>> >>--
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>http://www.irian.at
>>> >>
>>> >>Your JSF powerhouse -
>>> >>JSF Consulting, Development and
>>> >>Courses in English and German
>>> >>
>>> >>Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Hazem Ahmed Saleh Ahmed

Author of (The Definitive Guide to Apache MyFaces and Facelets):
http://www.amazon.com/Definitive-Guide-Apache-MyFaces-Facelets/dp/1590597370
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B002M052KY

Web blog: http://hazems.blogetery.com/

[Web 2.0] Mashups Integration with JSF:
http://code.google.com/p/mashups4jsf/

Mime
View raw message