AFAIK , richfaces doesn't(wasn't) work(ing) with myfaces/tomahawk. We are
using 1.2 RI for that.
There is also a known issue in the fileupload component working with the
portletbridge.


On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:12 AM, David Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Before I try them and end up pulling my hair out in frustration, am I
> likely to run into the same kind of issues that the tomahawk extension
> filter has?
>
> Youssef Mohammed wrote:
>
>> we dumped ICEfaces for richfaces that along with portletbridge work just
>> fine in portals.
>> The main issue we had then with ICEfaces was the comet/pushlet thing that
>> 1- You have to define new servlet that operate outside our JSF/Facelets
>> one.
>>
>> 2- doesn't scale well
>> 3- A hell of headache for firewalls that usually closed their longed lived
>> connections.
>> Having said that, the richfaces is used under JBoss Portal and we haven't
>> tried it under Jetspeed yet.
>>
>> Regards,
>>       Youssef
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Brad Gardner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> From what I can tell, its been done.  I however, am currently working on
>>> it
>>> myself and have had some difficulty getting the environment configuration
>>> right.  I've recently developed a portlet for a client using IceFaces
>>> that
>>> they run in Liferay, and from first hand experience can say that it is a
>>> very suitable framework for portlet development.  If I make any headway
>>> on
>>> getting my test portlet into Jetspeed 2 I'll be sure to let you know.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:52 AM, David Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>      Hi everyone, in my never ending quest to improve my user interface
>>>> I've
>>>> stumbled accross ICEfaces, a set of AJAX based jsf components. Now I've
>>>>
>>>>
>>> done
>>>
>>>
>>>> some web searches about integrating ICEfaces with Jetspeed, but mostly
>>>>
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> results are old and somewhat ambiguous and I was wondering if, before I
>>>>
>>>>
>>> go
>>>
>>>
>>>> too deep down the rabbit hole, anyone had tried this recently.
>>>>
>>>> Possible issues I've been seeing (but again, I'm unsure if these are
>>>>
>>>>
>>> "real"
>>>
>>>
>>>> problems still):
>>>>
>>>> Integration into portlet lifecycle / conflicts with standard jsf bridges
>>>> jars.
>>>> Possible conflicts between ICEfaces themes and portlet decorators.
>>>> Problems on pages that incorporate both ICEfaces and jsf portlets in the
>>>> same aggregation (unclear if this is more of a problem if they come from
>>>>
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> same .war or seperate .wars, judging by the possible issue with bridges
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I'm
>>>
>>>
>>>> guessing the latter).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any info about potential problems, links to decent descriptions of
>>>>
>>>>
>>> portlet
>>>
>>>
>>>> configs etc... would be useful.
>>>>
>>>> David Dyer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Brad Gardner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.21/1676 - Release
>> Date: 17/09/2008 9:33 AM
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


-- 
Regards, Youssef

Reply via email to