Afaik gpl3 is compatible with apache v2? On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org>wrote:
> I think the ExtJS has a GPL-style license, right ? > > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Cagatay Civici > <cagatay.civ...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I had terrible experiences with dojo in the past, if you say flaws are > > fixed, documentation is improved, then I'd be 0 instead of -1 :) Dojo is > > like ejb2 to me. I'd consider ExtJS as well instead of dojo. Maybe it's a > > better match of widgets compared to jquery ui. > > > > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Ganesh <gan...@j4fry.org> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Cagatay, > >> > >> Can we try to find arguments in favour of possible javascript libraries? > >> Why do you prefer jQuery? The tomahawk dependency is on dojo 0.4, > current is > >> 1.3.1, you just cannot compare them. jQuery plugins aren't part of the > main > >> jQuery project, so maintenance may be not guaranteed on the long term. > For > >> example the dojo dataGrid is still in dojox because it has minor issues, > but > >> it still is superior to all "stable" jQuery table plugins (e.g. > flexgrid) > >> I've seen. On the other hand the main jQuery project lacks basic widgets > >> (combo/select, input, table, ...). Also dojo has a comprehesive > validation > >> concept over all its widgets which isn't possible with the widespread > jQuery > >> plugins. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Ganesh > >> > >> Cagatay Civici schrieb: > >>> > >>> Tomahawk already has dojo a huge dependency. > >>> > >>> For the new lib I'd favor using jquery UI plus stable jquery plugins > >>> instead of dojo. > >>> > >>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < > mat...@apache.org > >>> <mailto:mat...@apache.org>> wrote: > >>> > >>> not sure I read that article, but I agree that it is worth to go the > >>> Facelets road, for new things. > >>> Not sure if EVERY 2.0 library needs to contain only template-based > >>> components; old-fashion > >>> renderers are still, ok... > >>> > >>> so generally you also think it is worth to host something like that > ? > >>> I personally would like to start with this by introducing a > >>> wrapper for > >>> jQuery (included via JSF 2.0 resource handling) > >>> > >>> -M > >>> > >>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Ganesh <gan...@j4fry.org > >>> <mailto:gan...@j4fry.org>> wrote: > >>> > Hi Matthias, > >>> > > >>> > Funny you're asking this today: Last night I've released the J4Fry > >>> > dojoFacelets library on sourceforge. It's a pure JSF > >>> template/dojo library, > >>> > it was build on JSF 1.1/1.2 w/Facelets and it runs on JSF 2.0 > >>> out of the > >>> > box. The templates are AJAX enabled via ui:define. The first > >>> project based > >>> > on the new components will be productive around juli in a > >>> european bank. > >>> > We've started working on this last autumn after I released this > >>> artivle in > >>> > german JavaMagazin, making the point that future JSF tag > >>> libraries must be > >>> > template based: > >>> > > >>> > >>> > http://www.j4fry.org/resources/jung_JSF_JavaMagazin_Tag_Entwicklung_mit_Facelets.pdf > . > >>> > The dojoFacelets are apache licensed and we would love to make > >>> them a > >>> > starting point for a new MyFaces subproject. > >>> > > >>> > Here's a link to the documentation: > >>> http://j4fry.org/dojoFacelets.shtml > >>> > (with links to examples and downloads - the JSF 2.0 example is > >>> currently > >>> > offline, check the JSF 1.2 example). > >>> > > >>> > Best regards, > >>> > Ganesh > >>> > > >>> > Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: > >>> >> > >>> >> Hi, > >>> >> > >>> >> sure MyFaces 2.0 is not yet there, but I want to share an idea... > >>> >> > >>> >> Since JSF 2.0 has the new Facelets support to easily create > >>> (custom) > >>> >> components, > >>> >> would it be a good idea to start a new (sandbox) project that > >>> defines > >>> >> a JSF 2.0 set > >>> >> of components, only written via the Facelets way ? > >>> >> > >>> >> I had to play with some fancy JS (jQuery) to make a "wow" *easy* > >>> >> component (via Facelets). > >>> >> I think it would be cool to have such a library that provides a > >>> kinda > >>> >> wrapper for some JS lib, > >>> >> e.g. jQuery. > >>> >> > >>> >> -Matthias > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>> > >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >
