Re: MyFaces: Retire 3.0 (possibly 2.3?)

[Thomas Andraschko]

If we support 2.3, we can easily support 3.0 - its the same codebase.

TomEE e.g. with 2.3 is EOL, whereas 9.0 with MF 3.0 is the current stable
version. This will propably change after the first 10.0 version.

Same as 2.3-next and 4.0, 4.1 and 5.0 is the same codebase.

Melloware Inc  schrieb am Di., 13. Feb. 2024, 00:53:

> I am +1 for supporting 2.3.
>
> But -1 for 3.0. I guess 17% running 9.0 shocks me as it was just a
> namespace change?   In fact my clients didn’t even bother with it and just
> waited for 4.0 final.  Arjun and Balus said it was more for libraries and
> containers to practice the new namespace it was not meant to be production
> level suppported. Red Hat did not provide a supported 9.0 version for Jboss
> they simply provided a preview version until EE10 went final.
>
> Not that it matters but we do not get any reports at PrimeFacces or
> OmniFaces repos of anyone running Faces 3.0. Most issues being reported are
> on 2.3 or 4.0.
>
> I just want to make sure we are spending are limited resources on the
> right things?
>
> Melloware
> @melloware on GitHub
>
> On Feb 12, 2024, at 9:35 AM, Paul Nicolucci  wrote:
>
> 
> Hi,
>
> I would like to see MyFaces continue to actively support both MyFaces 2.3
> and MyFaces 3.0 until there is a time when we see the use of these releases
> drastically decrease. Looking at the 2023 Jakarta EE Survey
> :
>
>
>
>1. 28% of respondents still use Jakarta EE8 (Faces 2.3) in 2023. This
>is up 4% from 2022.
>2. 17% of respondents are running Jakarta EE 9/9.1 in production
>(Faces 3.0) in 2023. This is up 3% from 2022.
>
> Given the above, we would discontinue active support for potentially 45%
> of our user base.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul Nicolucci
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:17 AM Melloware Inc 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Team,
>>
>> As the Mojarra team has completely stopped supporting the 2.3 and 3.0
>> branches should MyFaces as well?
>>
>> Arjan and Balus said that 3.0 was just the namespace change and no one
>> should be using it in production; they should be on 4.0 at this point now
>> that it is official.
>>
>> As for 2.3 retiring I am not sure about this one because 2.3 is the most
>> widely adopted version if I had to guess right now?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Melloware
>>
>>
>> --
>> ==
>> Melloware
>> melloware...@gmail.com
>> http://melloware.com
>> ==
>>
>

Re: MyFaces: Retire 3.0 (possibly 2.3?)

[Melloware Inc]

I am +1 for supporting 2.3. But -1 for 3.0. I guess 17% running 9.0 shocks me as it was just a namespace change?   In fact my clients didn’t even bother with it and just waited for 4.0 final.  Arjun and Balus said it was more for libraries and containers to practice the new namespace it was not meant to be production level suppported. Red Hat did not provide a supported 9.0 version for Jboss they simply provided a preview version until EE10 went final.  Not that it matters but we do not get any reports at PrimeFacces or OmniFaces repos of anyone running Faces 3.0. Most issues being reported are on 2.3 or 4.0.     I just want to make sure we are spending are limited resources on the right things?Melloware@melloware on GitHubOn Feb 12, 2024, at 9:35 AM, Paul Nicolucci  wrote:Hi,I would like to see MyFaces continue to actively support both MyFaces 2.3 and MyFaces 3.0 until there is a time when we see the use of these releases drastically decrease. Looking at the 2023 Jakarta EE Survey:  28% of respondents still use Jakarta EE8 (Faces 2.3) in 2023. This is up 4% from 2022.17% of respondents are running Jakarta EE 9/9.1 in production (Faces 3.0) in 2023. This is up 3% from 2022.Given the above, we would discontinue active support for potentially 45% of our user base.Regards,Paul NicolucciOn Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:17 AM Melloware Inc  wrote:Team,As the Mojarra team has completely stopped supporting the 2.3 and 3.0 branches should MyFaces as well?Arjan and Balus said that 3.0 was just the namespace change and no one should be using it in production; they should be on 4.0 at this point now that it is official.As for 2.3 retiring I am not sure about this one because 2.3 is the most widely adopted version if I had to guess right now?Thoughts?Melloware
-- ==
Melloware
melloware...@gmail.comhttp://melloware.com
==

Re: MyFaces: Retire 3.0 (possibly 2.3?)

[Paul Nicolucci]

Hi,

I would like to see MyFaces continue to actively support both MyFaces 2.3
and MyFaces 3.0 until there is a time when we see the use of these releases
drastically decrease. Looking at the 2023 Jakarta EE Survey
:



   1. 28% of respondents still use Jakarta EE8 (Faces 2.3) in 2023. This is
   up 4% from 2022.
   2. 17% of respondents are running Jakarta EE 9/9.1 in production (Faces
   3.0) in 2023. This is up 3% from 2022.

Given the above, we would discontinue active support for potentially 45% of
our user base.

Regards,

Paul Nicolucci

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:17 AM Melloware Inc 
wrote:

>
> Team,
>
> As the Mojarra team has completely stopped supporting the 2.3 and 3.0
> branches should MyFaces as well?
>
> Arjan and Balus said that 3.0 was just the namespace change and no one
> should be using it in production; they should be on 4.0 at this point now
> that it is official.
>
> As for 2.3 retiring I am not sure about this one because 2.3 is the most
> widely adopted version if I had to guess right now?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Melloware
>
>
> --
> ==
> Melloware
> melloware...@gmail.com
> http://melloware.com
> ==
>

Fwd: MyFaces: Retire 3.0 (possibly 2.3?)

[Melloware Inc]

Team,

As the Mojarra team has completely stopped supporting the 2.3 and 3.0
branches should MyFaces as well?

Arjan and Balus said that 3.0 was just the namespace change and no one
should be using it in production; they should be on 4.0 at this point now
that it is official.

As for 2.3 retiring I am not sure about this one because 2.3 is the most
widely adopted version if I had to guess right now?

Thoughts?

Melloware


-- 
==
Melloware
melloware...@gmail.com
http://melloware.com
==