i was thinking to something like that but was expecting some feedback

i'll have a look

- Romain


2012/7/19 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>

> I now looked at OpenEJBs CustomApplicationFactory and the only thing it
> does different to the OWB impl is to check in the AppContext if CDI should
> be used at all.
>
> The same functionality could be provided much easier by simply skipping
> all the CDI initialisation and startup if it should not be used in the
> OpenEJBLifecycle.
>
> That way you would not need to tweak anything for JSF integration at all.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 3:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: Owb jsf?
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Please let me first explain what we do in webbeans-jsf.
> >
> >
> > First, it obviously contains all the JSF-2 functionality as we like to
> keep the
> > OWB core (webbeans-impl) independent of any other spec. OWB core only
> contains
> > core EE APIs like cdi, atinject and interceptors. No JSF, no JPA, no
> EJB, etc.
> >
> >
> > The are two functions we need to integrate within the JSF container,
> both of are
> > enabled via a faces-config.xml in the webbeans-jsf module:
> >
> > 1.) the Conversation handling is done via a PhaseListener + ViewHandler.
> > That's pretty straight forward and I don't think that it has anything to
> > do with EJB. So I see no need that this functionality gets touched by
> OpenEJB.
> >
> > 2.) the CDI spec defines in " 11.3.16. Wrapping a Unified EL
> > ExpressionFactory" + " 6.4.3. Dependent pseudo-scope and Unified
> > EL" that @Dependent beans used in EL expressions are valid for all the
> > expression and only get destroyed after the expression got evaluated. We
> provide
> > this via Wrapping the JSF Application which registers the wrapped
> > ExpressionFactory and we also add our own WebBeansELResolver.
> >
> > I'm not sure which parts of the tricks above you need to avoid. Providing
> > additional mechanism on top should rather be provided by simply
> registering an
> > own Wrapper for those parts imo.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >>  From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
> >>  To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> >>  Cc:
> >>  Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 8:52 AM
> >>  Subject: Owb jsf?
> >>
> >>  Hi,
> >>
> >>  Anyone tried to replace our openejb-openwebbeans-jsf and openejb-jsf by
> >>  openwebbeans-jsf recently?
> >>
> >>  Wonder if we still need it.
> >>
> >>  Could be nice to avoid it.
> >>
> >>  - Romain
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to