Agree with Werner's assessment on JSF2.0 adoption. The 1.2 adoption curve shouldn't be a benchmark for 2.0 adoption.
I think 2.0, when it goes final, is going to have significant uptake. Apple might already be using the Mojarra snapshot for one of its rebate processes: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/edburns/archive/2008/09/apple_using_jsf.html Cheers, Zubin. http://zwadia.com On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Robinson schrieb: > >> However, as Matthias pointed out, JSF 2.0 standardize Trinidad's principal >>> core features namely PPR and Resource handling and hopefully skinning >>> too. >>> Under such circumstances, I feel that we should wait for 2.0 to be >>> cemented >>> before going through a massive refactoring of some of the old and twisted >>> code parts so that the refactored design is fully compatible with 1.2, >>> but >>> using 2.0 concept to make the upgrade to 2.0 easier imho. >>> >> >> Although those are really good concerns, I wonder how long it will >> take JSF2 to be adopted. It seems like many are even reluctant to >> adopt 1.2. So I wonder if it is still worth it for us to make an >> effort to at least clean up the 1.2 trunk? (I did not mention the 1.0 >> trunk as I seem to have lost my desire to maintain the JSF 1.1 code >> myself) >> >> Well the JSF 1.2 adaption is slow, due to several reasons, some people > cannot due to the Java 5 adoption inherent to JEE5 (Political concerns). > > For others it simply is not worth it, they do not gain too much, most areas > JSF 1.2 addresses are covered already by extensions. > > JSF2 however is an entirely different issue, if it works out it removes > pretty much every weak point of jsf and adds a lot of stuff people really > need in their day to day applications. I assume the adoption will probably > very high with new applications probably trying to target 2.0 asap! > > > I guess it comes down to time and desire. I worry about the UIXNode >> conversion as I don't yet fully understand that code enough to feel >> comfortable porting it without missing things. I guess I could create >> sandbox renderers for the components, then if they look complete, we >> could promote them & replace the UIXNode ones at that time. Is there a >> WIKI page that I missed that talks about how to convert these guys or >> about any of the UIXNode architecture? >> > +1 > >
