Faces FAQ, news, and info
From: Dakota Jack
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 1:08
AMTo: Struts Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject:
Re: [action2] Combining JSF and SAF2
Are there any figures on this market junk? Or is this more
Bush-Speak, lies to get
After talking with several on this list about the possibility of
combining the best of JSF and Action 2 in a unified framework from a
user perspective, I have completed a first cut at JSF support in Action
2 with this loftly goal.
From a user perspective, you still have one configuration
Who wants these frameworks combined? This is what has been killing Struts.
This is anything but a lofty goal. It is architectural suicide. There is
Shale, which could not really do this. Why is that not enough or in fact
way too much? This is ridiculous. I hope people on this list see this
I have seen no very popular need. This is like Bush-Speak. Baloney
parading as truth.
On 5/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After talking with several on this list about the possibility of
combining the best of JSF and Action 2 in a unified framework from a
user perspective, I have
Oh wonderful, more comments from the list idiot.
K.
On 5/21/06, Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who wants these frameworks combined? This is what has been killing Struts.
This is anything but a lofty goal. It is architectural suicide. There is
Shale, which could not really do this.
To anyone following these thread, please ignore this fool. He does
not speak for anyone, and is only here to confuse people.
K.
On 5/21/06, Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have seen no very popular need. This is like Bush-Speak. Baloney
parading as truth.
On 5/21/06, Don Brown
Don, this is *very* interesting. Nice work. I've been wondering for a
while if we could reuse off-the-shelf JSF components. It looks like
you may have figured out how!
It also proves that you can think of the JSF lifecycle as a more
complex, higher level of abstraction of our interceptor
Don, this is *very* interesting. Nice work. I've been
wondering for a
while if we could reuse off-the-shelf JSF components.
It looks like
you may have figured out how!
It also proves that you can think of the JSF
lifecycle as a more
complex, higher level of abstraction of our
Jason Carreira wrote:
Great work Don! This is very cool. I've been saying we could do this for a long
time, but it's good to know I wasn't just making that up :-)
Heh, I know. After bragging about it after many beers at JavaOne, I
figured it was time to put up or shut up :)
I think it's
I've been historically pretty anti-JSF, so I hope this means something
in light of that history: this is *very* interesting and I congratulate
you on making it happen! I've had the same I think it can be done
thoughts about mixing the two, just never actually did anything with the
idea, so
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I've been historically pretty anti-JSF, so I hope this means something
in light of that history: this is *very* interesting and I
congratulate you on making it happen! I've had the same I think it
can be done thoughts about mixing the two, just never actually did
I am not opposed to having JSF and Action2 work together.
If they can play together, and you can find a business case to
parts of each in a project, I think that's a big win. As long
as they can still be used separately, then I am +1.
--- Bob Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don, this is *very*
A bit of a tangential question here... does Webwork support inheritance
of some sort with regard to Action mappings? Or perhaps some sort of
prototype? I think it's great that you can set things on a per-mapping
basis, that makes things very flexible and powerful... but one can
imagine where
You can inherit packages and their defined defaults. Therefore, in this
case, you could define the default interceptor stack and result type for
a root package then not have to specify it in any action configs of that
package or child packages.
Don
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
A bit of a
Cool! Thanks :)
Frank
Don Brown wrote:
You can inherit packages and their defined defaults. Therefore, in this
case, you could define the default interceptor stack and result type for
a root package then not have to specify it in any action configs of that
package or child packages.
Don
This post shows who the limited person is. It is you, Ma'am.
On 5/21/06, Kimani Darisha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh wonderful, more comments from the list idiot.
K.
On 5/21/06, Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who wants these frameworks combined? This is what has been killing Struts.
You are right, for once. I only speak for myself. Those who are
unwilling to listen to others are condemned by their own choice to a
life of ignorance.
On 5/21/06, Kimani Darisha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To anyone following these thread, please ignore this fool. He does
not speak for anyone,
Like I said before, use Shale to fork from, adding the JSP to it. (or if
shale adds JSP tags, no reason for SAF2).
.V
Jason Carreira wrote:
I think it's interesting to think of the JSF lifecycle as a particular profile
of our interceptor lifecycle. Similarly, the Portlet support is a
From: Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are right, for once. I only speak for myself. Those who are
unwilling to listen to others are condemned by their own choice to a
life of ignorance.
Sheese, sorry this got your panties in a bunch.
On 5/21/06, Kimani Darisha wrote:
To anyone
Of course you aren't, Gary, because my panties are not in a bunch.
You are the one with his panties in a bunch because you are here for
JSF and JSF alone anyway and you don't like me having pointed out that
your contributions did not merit your status. You can side with
Kamini if you like, but
From: Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of course you aren't, Gary, because my panties are not in a bunch.
You are the one with his panties in a bunch because you are here for
JSF and JSF alone anyway and you don't like me having pointed out that
your contributions did not merit your status.
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: [action2] Combining JSF and SAF2
After talking with several on this list about the possibility
of combining the best of JSF and Action 2 in a unified
framework from a user perspective, I have completed a first
cut at JSF support in Action
2
On 5/21/06, Kito D. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Congrats, Don! I'm very encouraged, and I'm anxious to check it out. This
will allow SAF2 developers to work with JSF components (and the market is
growing nicely).
I wonder how well Shale will run in this context...
Don and I had a chance
In the Action 2 approach, you should be able to use any feature of
Shale, or any other JSF extension, that doesn't involve a custom
NavigationHandler, since that is overridden to defer to Action 2-style
navigation, or a custom Lifecycle. By leaving JSF alone otherwise, you
should be able to
Sounds like Ted. Let me say that anyone that says web services is a
half-baked CICS is really not worth listening to. That is ridiculous. I am
really amazed at the nutty things said on this list. If you think that web
services is coincident with SOA that is equal madness. Do you guys think
://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info
-Original Message-
From: Don Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 3:55 AM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: [action2] Combining JSF and SAF2
After talking with several on this list about the possibility
Since Kito is committed and has been to JSF Central, why pretend that he
needs to know about this. These are like those paid 1 hour commercials we
have to put up with on Sunday mornings that attempt to distort the truth.
Give us a break.
On 5/21/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
27 matches
Mail list logo
