+1 for doing a M1 release - all of the points you've made are great, Thomas. For versioning, I think the 2.3-modern proposal is good (although somefaces isn't bad!)
The quarkus extension is interesting as well. I haven't done any testing with that yet, but adding it to the myfaces repo seems reasonable. Regards, Bill On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 1:20 PM Thomas Andraschko < andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > for me it doesn't matter if we call it 2.3-modern or 3.0-M1 or even > org.github.somefaces. > > I just think that 3.0-M1 isn't a good choice as > - i would still like to release it with javax instead jakarta > - releasing a 3.0-M1 with the old javax namespace AND with the knowledge > that the next 2.x will be with jakarta namespace sounds weird > > I generel would just like to cut a release to make it usable and to show > the people that: > - we are active > - we are (almost) completely refactored our code and make it more modern > - better performance > - much less jar size (1 MB!) > - we have a working quarkus extension (!) ( > https://github.com/tandraschko/quarkus-myfaces) > - we reimplemented the jsf.js with TypeScript (i would like that Werner > can commit it after we cut the M1 release) > > Just again, the current master now is: > API: 100% JSF2.3, also with the javax namespace > IMPL: without FacesEL, ManagedBeans implemented as CDI-Delegate and > annotation-config only. > > About quarkus: > i tried to make it into quarkus directly but they don't like it and it > also doesn't work on native (EL requires to much reflection). > It would be great if we can add the quarkus-extension to the myfaces > codebase as i dont lke to maintain it under my repository. Maybe in > myfaces-core/extensions/quarkus. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > > Am Do., 12. Dez. 2019 um 18:48 Uhr schrieb Paul Nicolucci < > pnicolu...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> What are the long term consequences of releasing something like >> 2.3.6-modern or org.apache.myfaces.core:myfaces-api-modern:2.3.0? Can we >> just rename it to myfaces 4.0 or whatever the spec version ends up being >> for Jakarta EE10 once we know what it is going to involve? We already know >> that MyFaces 3.0 will be Jakarta EE 9 as far as I can tell. As we discussed >> previously Jakarta EE9 would likely just be taking JSF 2.3 and using the >> new Jakarta namespace. >> >> I just want to ensure that whatever we do now we're not left supporting a >> 2.3.modern long term and we can replace it with whatever the appropriate >> version of JSF is once we have a new specification from Jakarta. >> >> I agree that it would be nice to get something out there for folks to >> start working with and testing. >> >> Whatever we do we'll want to clearly document what the new version is so >> users know what they're getting. >> >> Regards, >> >> Paul Nicolucci >> >> On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 3:39 PM Thomas Andraschko < >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Commited something now. managed-beans in XML are not supported for now. >>> Would be great if we can agree on some version/artifact-id, to release >>> something like a M1. >>> >>> Am So., 8. Dez. 2019 um 13:14 Uhr schrieb Thomas Andraschko < >>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Or leave the same artifact and Version and do a: 2.3.6-modern >>>> >>>> The we dont have to add new Versions in jira. Makes everything bit >>>> easier >>>> >>>> Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 8. >>>> Dez. 2019, 13:03: >>>> >>>>> I also thought about another way of releasing it. >>>>> Whats the big difference between 2.3 and 3.0 currently: >>>>> - removed ManagedBeans >>>>> - removed FacesEL >>>>> - big cleanup >>>>> >>>>> If we would simply readd the ManagedBean API, we could register the >>>>> found beans as CDI beans. Thats what DeltaSpike makes. >>>>> We could also add back the FacesEL API but not the impl. Its not used >>>>> anymore by any component lib. >>>>> >>>>> So we would have a JSF 2.3 compatible release which delegates the >>>>> ManagedBeans to CDI. That will make it usable by all CDI users. >>>>> >>>>> Wdyt? >>>>> We could call it: >>>>> org.apache.myfaces.core:myfaces-api-modern:2.3.0 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 19. >>>>> Nov. 2019, 22:21: >>>>> >>>>>> no problem, lets wait. >>>>>> we could also release it as something like 2.3-minmal or something. >>>>>> >>>>>> Am Di., 19. Nov. 2019 um 22:05 Uhr schrieb Paul Nicolucci < >>>>>> pnicolu...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> This actually came up on the platform dev call this morning. A >>>>>>> thread was started here for discussion: >>>>>>> https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-platform-dev/msg00907.html >>>>>>> I think we should follow that conversation and wait for a release until >>>>>>> those details are hammered out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just don't want us to release a JSF 3.0 with new functionality in >>>>>>> it when it might be true that 3.0 would be the version for just the >>>>>>> Jakarta >>>>>>> namespace update and the release Thomas is working on would be something >>>>>>> other than 3.0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 3:17 PM Paul Nicolucci <pnicolu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the information Thomas. I just sent a note to the >>>>>>>> mailing list to get clarification for us: >>>>>>>> https://www.eclipse.org/lists/faces-dev/msg00006.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:40 PM Thomas Andraschko < >>>>>>>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Arjan has it as 2.9 in its presentation. Not sure. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci <pnicolu...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 15. Nov. >>>>>>>>> 2019, 18:26: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are we sure it is 2.9 and not 2.4? We might want to check that >>>>>>>>>> just to be sure I'm not saying it is incorrect I just didn't see it >>>>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>> to 2.9. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Thomas Andraschko < >>>>>>>>>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK Jakarta 9 will contain JSF 2.3 with Jakarta namespace + >>>>>>>>>>> version bumped to 2.9. >>>>>>>>>>> I dont think that this is huge effort. Just fork 2.3 and rename >>>>>>>>>>> everything. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Current 3.0 Targets Jakarta10 / JSF 3 with removed Faces EL, >>>>>>>>>>> Managed Beans and heavy cleanup. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would do this: >>>>>>>>>>> - release 3.0 M1 with javax, the current code ist stable, >>>>>>>>>>> faster, smaller and OK to use >>>>>>>>>>> - fork 2.3 as 2.9 and change to Jakarta package and do 2.9M1 >>>>>>>>>>> - Change Jakarta namespace on 3.0 and do a 3.0M2 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci <pnicolu...@gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 15. Nov. >>>>>>>>>>> 2019, 17:18: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we also need to start thinking about the package name >>>>>>>>>>>> changes from javax.faces to jakarta.faces for the API. This would >>>>>>>>>>>> be a >>>>>>>>>>>> change that would certainly be in JSF 3.0 whenever that >>>>>>>>>>>> specification comes >>>>>>>>>>>> out (Jakarta EE 10?). In addition I think the Jakarta community is >>>>>>>>>>>> looking >>>>>>>>>>>> to release Jakarta EE 9 which would just be Java EE 8 with the API >>>>>>>>>>>> package >>>>>>>>>>>> name change javax->jakarta so we need to start looking at a >>>>>>>>>>>> Jakarta 9 >>>>>>>>>>>> branch perhaps in the MyFaces code base. I would think that the >>>>>>>>>>>> Jakarta EE >>>>>>>>>>>> 9 changes would more than likely jump the JSF spec version to 2.4. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In my opinion we should hold off on a release, review the >>>>>>>>>>>> Jakarta information and make any necessary changes to the MyFaces >>>>>>>>>>>> code base >>>>>>>>>>>> as the Jakarta projects move forward. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For the current Jakarta EE 9 Status see: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-platform/blob/gh-pages/minutes/2019-11-12.md >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Paul Nicolucci >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 2:36 PM Thomas Andraschko < >>>>>>>>>>>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> JFYI: >>>>>>>>>>>>> i think i'm finally "done" with the refactorings. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I will start with a release vote the next days. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Virenfrei. >>>>>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <#m_-3848224423506222137_m_489152061998685533_m_-1753698412982687697_m_3295967184575249173_m_-3336635815354477889_m_4776714238409668344_m_-2613558047958076262_m_7419120885498924195_m_-5143760612097938423_m_4414407687902447532_m_-3948930198793418650_m_853411485417842697_m_8209636381781010786_m_-2701175102028896175_m_1314111415991572004_m_119743608639799328_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sa., 20. Apr. 2019 um 09:27 Uhr schrieb Werner Punz < >>>>>>>>>>>>> werner.p...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 from my side. I will add a bunch of additional client >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests after easter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Fr., 19. Apr. 2019 um 21:44 Uhr schrieb Thomas Andraschko < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT about release a M1? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current master received a BIG cleanup compared to 2.3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we already removed @ManagedBeans and Faces EL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also introduced integrationtests and Werner provided many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests for the client side. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think its a good time to release a M1 and maybe get some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback. Maybe also a good promotion that we currently more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> active as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> competitors ;) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thomas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Virenfrei. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <#m_-3848224423506222137_m_489152061998685533_m_-1753698412982687697_m_3295967184575249173_m_-3336635815354477889_m_4776714238409668344_m_-2613558047958076262_m_7419120885498924195_m_-5143760612097938423_m_4414407687902447532_m_-3948930198793418650_m_853411485417842697_m_8209636381781010786_m_-2701175102028896175_m_1314111415991572004_m_119743608639799328_m_129114922430811379_m_-3822526704907192759_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
