Well... don't lets discuss that much about why another thing... Perhaps all these existing techniques can get their profit from the other one and can also give valuable feedback to web beans / jsr 299.
I am happy that *Fusion* (or Kleber) has no dependency to WebFlow. I would prefer a closer connection to the Shale (Basic) Dialog. However... it's good to have the choice... Take a look at ORM or web frameworks... there are more than one, doing 99% same like the other... also the advent of JSF didn't stop that (like GWT for instance). Thx, Matthias On 3/2/07, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Craig! > 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? Don't know much about SWF, but we had a meeting with Jürgen Höller from interface21 where he helped designing the integration of the conversation scope with Spring including the persistence stuff. If SWF would have been possible to do this he would have said it. Also Fusion do depend on Spring 2, but not that hard ... for sure, it uses its possibility to create custom scopes and makes use of their persistence framework, though, its still modular enough that - if JSF will ever allow custom scopes - it can be plugged in there too. What might be possible is, that SWF make use of this new scope too - Fusion is also designed in a way that you can replace the web framework (in the important area). Maybe (I hope for the future) shale-dialog can make use of this scope too, and can provide a solution for the persistence that way. Ciao, Mario
-- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
