Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi! > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. Looks Cool, I love it to see that a long standing idea now seems to be realized. You posted on the dev list .. cool .. you probably know we are developers too ... so .. where do we find the code? Or is it just a too-late April joke ;-) I think that would make a great new module for myfaces, no? Ciao, Mario
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > Looks Cool, I love it to see that a long standing idea now seems to be > realized. > > You posted on the dev list .. cool .. you probably know we are > developers too ... so .. where do we find the code? Or is it just a > too-late April joke ;-) > > I think that would make a great new module for myfaces, no? would be a good candidate for the commons-validator, since not tied to Trinidad, Tobago, Tomahawk or what ever. -M > > Ciao, > Mario > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi Gerhard, sounds fancy and simple! Nice work! I think i will take a closer look. How stable is it in the mean time? Regards, Martin On 4/3/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > some central features: > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > - support for jpa based validation > - zero configuration > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello mario, at the moment it's not available at a public repository. my current plan is to publish it within the next view weeks. i agree with you - sev-en would be a great myfaces module! regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi! > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > Looks Cool, I love it to see that a long standing idea now seems to be > realized. > > You posted on the dev list .. cool .. you probably know we are > developers too ... so .. where do we find the code? Or is it just a > too-late April joke ;-) > > I think that would make a great new module for myfaces, no? > > Ciao, > > Mario > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi, On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > some central features: > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > - support for jpa based validation > - zero configuration > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > what's your opinion about this extension? sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation "framework". Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's validators (used heavily in Seam) -M > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello, @matthias: in my opinion the best solution would be an independent sub-project -> e.g. myfaces sev-en @martin: it started just as private feasibility study. the demo works great. however, it needs e.g. junit test-cases, much more annotations and such things. (please note - the sev-en core is independent of specific annotations - you can implement your own annotations [1]) you see - there is still some work to do. maybe some volunteers will join the development after publishing it. would be great! regards, gerhard [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-implement-your-own.html 2008/4/4, Martin Haimberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi Gerhard, > > sounds fancy and simple! Nice work! I think i will take a closer look. How > stable is it in the mean time? > > Regards, > Martin > > > On 4/3/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > some central features: > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > - support for jpa based validation > > - zero configuration > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > > more) at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello mario, today i uploaded an intermediate result of the demo. all information are available at the sev-en section of my blog [1]. regards, gerhard [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en 2008/4/4, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi! > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > Looks Cool, I love it to see that a long standing idea now seems to be > realized. > > You posted on the dev list .. cool .. you probably know we are > developers too ... so .. where do we find the code? Or is it just a > too-late April joke ;-) > > I think that would make a great new module for myfaces, no? > > Ciao, > > Mario > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi I have run the example on my tomcat installation. This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with (tomahawk or tobago) regards Leonardo Uribe
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Another question
If I have a validator, does exists annotations to use it like:
@Validator("org.apache.myfaces.custom.emailvalidator.EmailValidator")
private string email;
Or the annotations should have defined inside sev-en
regards
Leonardo Uribe
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have run the example on my tomcat installation.
>
> This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with
> (tomahawk or tobago)
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
>
>
>
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello leonardo, you don't need trinidad - i used it just for the demo! you will find the requirements at my blog [1] ;) regards, gerhard [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-framework-requirements.html 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi > > I have run the example on my tomcat installation. > > This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with > (tomahawk or tobago) > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Gerhard Petracek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello leonardo, > > you don't need trinidad - i used it just for the demo! > you will find the requirements at my blog [1] ;) > And jdk 1.5 is required (myfaces 1.1 is for 1.4) > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-framework-requirements.html > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Hi > > > > I have run the example on my tomcat installation. > > > > This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with > > (tomahawk or tobago) > > > > regards > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra instead of yet another project. On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > some central features: > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > - support for jpa based validation > > - zero configuration > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > "framework". > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's > validators > (used heavily in Seam) > > -M > > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello leonardo,
once again (as mentioned within my blog):
the core of sev-en is independent of specific annotations.
-> if you would like to have the mentioned annotation -> implement and
provide it. ;)
you will find a short description at my blog [1]
as you see within the demo:
validators within your page are not affected by sev-en.
regards,
gerhard
[1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-implement-your-own.html
2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Another question
>
> If I have a validator, does exists annotations to use it like:
>
>@Validator("org.apache.myfaces.custom.emailvalidator.EmailValidator")
>private string email;
>
> Or the annotations should have defined inside sev-en
>
> regards
>
> Leonardo Uribe
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I have run the example on my tomcat installation.
> >
> > This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with
> > (tomahawk or tobago)
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Leonardo Uribe
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello leonardo, that's right - because of the fact you are using annotations ;) regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello leonardo, > > > > you don't need trinidad - i used it just for the demo! > > you will find the requirements at my blog [1] ;) > > > > And jdk 1.5 is required (myfaces 1.1 is for 1.4) > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-framework-requirements.html > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I have run the example on my tomcat installation. > > > > > > This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with > > > (tomahawk or tobago) > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe myfaces-commons-sev-en. regards Leonardo Uribe On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello andrew, > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > > instead of yet another project. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > > > some central features: > > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > > - zero configuration > > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and > > much more) > > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > > > "framework". > > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's > > validators > > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > > [2] > > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > further stuff: > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello andrew, sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > instead of yet another project. > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > some central features: > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > - zero configuration > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > more) > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > > "framework". > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's > validators > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > [2] > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > -- > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
> And jdk 1.5 is required (myfaces 1.1 is for 1.4) @nnotation bring that requirement to the table. which is cool. That the CORE impl of JSF 1.1 needs Java1.4 doesn't mean, that every 1.1 complaint lib is also having that (poor) requirement ;-) -M > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-framework-requirements.html > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I have run the example on my tomcat installation. > > > > > > This works only with trinidad, or I can plug any jsf lib to use with > (tomahawk or tobago) > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello leonardo, concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. sev-en should stay independent! + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool > idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello andrew, > > > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > > > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > > > instead of yet another project. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > > > > > some central features: > > > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > > > - zero configuration > > > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and > > > much more) > > > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented > > > validation > > > > "framework". > > > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to > > > @Hibernate's validators > > > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > > > [2] > > > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > further stuff: > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Gerhard Petracek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello leonardo, > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with > myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > sev-en should stay independent! > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > Ok, the idea is explore all possibilities and take the best. > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very > > cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > > > regards > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > hello andrew, > > > > > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > > > > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > > > > instead of yet another project. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > > > > > > > some central features: > > > > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity > > > > validation) > > > > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > > > > - zero configuration > > > > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and > > > > much more) > > > > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > > > > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > > > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented > > > > validation > > > > > "framework". > > > > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to > > > > @Hibernate's validators > > > > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > > > > [2] > > > > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > > further stuff: > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello leonardo, that's ok! :) it's great to have these discussions. regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello leonardo, > > > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra > > with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > > sev-en should stay independent! > > > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > > > > Ok, the idea is explore all possibilities and take the best. > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very > > > cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > > > > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this > > > on orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > > > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > hello andrew, > > > > > > > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > > > > > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > > > > > instead of yet another project. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some central features: > > > > > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity > > > > > validation) > > > > > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > > > > > - zero configuration > > > > > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] > > > > > and much more) > > > > > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > > > > > > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR > > > > > ? > > > > > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented > > > > > validation > > > > > > "framework". > > > > > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to > > > > > @Hibernate's validators > > > > > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > > > > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > > > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff: > > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
RE: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Gerhard, Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities and features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about conversations and persistence contexts. ~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action <http://www.virtua.com/> http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info phone: +1 203-653-2989 fax: +1 203-653-2988 From: Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM To: MyFaces Development Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations hello leonardo, concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. sev-en should stay independent! + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe myfaces-commons-sev-en. regards Leonardo Uribe On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: hello andrew, sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra instead of yet another project. On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > some central features: > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > - support for jpa based validation > > - zero configuration > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > "framework". > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's validators > (used heavily in Seam) > > -M > > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello kito, you can put every extension into a "commons" module. orchestra is about conversations and persistence and sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Gerhard, > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities and > features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about > conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > ~~~ > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> - JavaServer Faces > FAQ, news, and info > phone: +1 203-653-2989 > fax: +1 203-653-2988 > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM > *To:* MyFaces Development > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > hello leonardo, > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with > myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > sev-en should stay independent! > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > > regards, > gerhard > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool > idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hello andrew, > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > regards, > gerhard > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > instead of yet another project. > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > some central features: > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > - zero configuration > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > more) > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > > "framework". > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's > validators > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > > [2] > http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > > > -- > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > -- > > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
RE: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
From: Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM To: MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations hello kito, you can put every extension into a "commons" module. I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of the module, and the number of perceived users. To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since Tomahawk contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some basic validators. orchestra is about conversations and persistence and sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Gerhard, Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities and features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about conversations and persistence contexts. ~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action <http://www.virtua.com/> http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info phone: +1 203-653-2989 fax: +1 203-653-2988 From: Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM To: MyFaces Development Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations hello leonardo, concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. sev-en should stay independent! + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe myfaces-commons-sev-en. regards Leonardo Uribe On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: hello andrew, sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra instead of yet another project. On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > some central features: > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > - support for jpa based validation > > - zero configuration > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > "framework". > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's validators > (used heavily in Seam) > > -M > > > > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello, maybe there is a misunderstanding in view of the used annotations, jsr 303 and so on. as mentioned before: the sev-en core is independent of specific annotations! e.g. you can implement your own annotations [1] regards, gerhard [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-implement-your-own.html 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > hello kito, > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of the > module, and the number of perceived users. > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since Tomahawk > contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some basic > validators. > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > and > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the commons > module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > > regards, > gerhard > > > 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Gerhard, > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities and > features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about > conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > ~~~ > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> - JavaServer Faces > FAQ, news, and info > phone: +1 203-653-2989 > fax: +1 203-653-2988 > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM > *To:* MyFaces Development > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > hello leonardo, > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with > myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > sev-en should stay independent! > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > > regards, > gerhard > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool > idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hello andrew, > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > regards, > gerhard > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > instead of yet another project. > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > some central features: > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > - zero configuration > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > more) > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > > "framework". > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hibernate's > validators > > (used heavily in Seam) > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi, I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and Simon couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like viewController, dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie right? So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets merged in Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. Cagatay On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > hello kito, > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of the > module, and the number of perceived users. > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since Tomahawk > contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some basic > validators. > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > and > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the commons > module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > > regards, > gerhard > > > 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Gerhard, > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities and > features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about > conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > ~~~ > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> - JavaServer Faces > FAQ, news, and info > phone: +1 203-653-2989 > fax: +1 203-653-2988 > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM > *To:* MyFaces Development > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > hello leonardo, > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra with > myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > sev-en should stay independent! > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > > regards, > gerhard > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very cool > idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hello andrew, > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > regards, > gerhard > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > instead of yet another project. > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > > > some central features: > > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > > - support for jpa based validation > > > - zero configuration > > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > more) > > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > sounds interesting. Is that levering the "bean validation" JSR ? > > Would be cool to have a little bit more standard oriented validation > > "framework". > > Otherwise (IMO) that would be just something similar to @Hiberna
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello cagatay, i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! however, it isn't alone out there. (e.g. spring web flow and much more) if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the core depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) regards, gerhard 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi, > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and Simon > couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like viewController, > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie right? > So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets merged in > Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > Cagatay > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > hello kito, > > > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of the > > module, and the number of perceived users. > > > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since Tomahawk > > contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some basic > > validators. > > > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > > and > > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the > > commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Gerhard, > > > > > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities > > and features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is about > > conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > > > > > ~~~ > > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring > > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> - JavaServer > > Faces FAQ, news, and info > > phone: +1 203-653-2989 > > fax: +1 203-653-2988 > > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM > > *To:* MyFaces Development > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > hello leonardo, > > > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra > > with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > > sev-en should stay independent! > > > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > > (the pronunciation isn't [sev] ... [en] - it's like the 7 in english) > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/4, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > I have tried the demo on my workstation, and in my opinion is a very > > cool idea and this should be on myfaces :) > > > > The idea of include with myfaces-commons sounds better that put this on > > orchestra (someone could want to use this only). Maybe > > myfaces-commons-sev-en. > > > > regards > > > > Leonardo Uribe > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Gerhard Petracek < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > hello andrew, > > > > sev-en is completely independent of orchestra or the idea behind it. > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/4, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Since this is currently supported in Seam and Orchestra is a Seam > > spin-off/clone, perhaps this should be incorporated into Orchestra > > instead of yet another project.
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi All... There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we started it as an Apache Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the svn repo of the new project: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation requirements, like JSF or EJB specific validations. On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello cagatay, > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > however, it isn't alone out there. > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the core > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Hi, > > > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and Simon > > couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like viewController, > > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie right? > > So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets merged in > > Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > > > Cagatay > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > > > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > hello kito, > > > > > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > > > > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of the > > > module, and the number of perceived users. > > > > > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since > > > Tomahawk contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some > > > basic validators. > > > > > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > > > and > > > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > > > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > > > > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the > > > commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > Gerhard, > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful utilities > > > and features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. Orchestra is > > > about > > > conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~ > > > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > > > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and > > > mentoring > > > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.com/> - JavaServer > > > Faces FAQ, news, and info > > > phone: +1 203-653-2989 > > > fax: +1 203-653-2988 > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 12:56 PM > > > *To:* MyFaces Development > > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > hello leonardo, > > > > > > concerning myfaces-commons-sev-en: > > > i don't agree. it's similar if you suggest to merge myfaces-orchestra > > > with myfaces-commons. - in my opinion that's not a good idea. > > > sev-en should stay independent! > > > > > > + commons-sev-en sounds strage. :) > > > (the pronu
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello, (the sev-en core doesn't provide specific annotations. maybe there will be an annotation module to support jsr 303 annotations, which might act as adapter for the project you mentioned.) or are you suggesting to publish sev-en as a sub-project of the commons project? regards, gerhard 2008/4/7, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi All... > > There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - > http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we started it as an Apache > Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the svn > repo of the new project: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ > > IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation requirements, > like JSF or EJB specific validations. > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello cagatay, > > > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > > however, it isn't alone out there. > > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the core > > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and Simon > > > couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like viewController, > > > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > > > > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie > > > right? So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets > > > merged > > > in Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > > > > > Cagatay > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > > > > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hello kito, > > > > > > > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > > > > > > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of > > > > the module, and the number of perceived users. > > > > > > > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since > > > > Tomahawk contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like some > > > > basic validators. > > > > > > > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > > > > and > > > > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > > > > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > > > > > > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the > > > > commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > Gerhard, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, it's different. Commons is a collection of useful > > > > utilities and features. Think of it in terms of the Apache Commons. > > > > Orchestra is about conversations and persistence contexts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~ > > > > Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action > > > > http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and > > > > mentoring > > > > http://www.JSFCentral.com <http://www.jsfcentral.c
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hello, Iam just suggesting a standard way of validation that we are going to implement in the next days which can be useful later for JSF or EJB projects. This project is currently a subproject of the apache commons project. IMHO if sev-en can support JSR-303 annotations, this will be great! Thank you. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Gerhard Petracek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello, > > (the sev-en core doesn't provide specific annotations. > maybe there will be an annotation module to support jsr 303 annotations, > which might act as adapter for the project you mentioned.) > > or are you suggesting to publish sev-en as a sub-project of the commons > project? > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/7, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Hi All... > > > > There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - > > http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we started it as an Apache > > Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the svn > > repo of the new project: > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ > > > > IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation requirements, > > like JSF or EJB specific validations. > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > hello cagatay, > > > > > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > > > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > > > > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > > > however, it isn't alone out there. > > > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > > > > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > > > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > > > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the core > > > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and > > > > Simon couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like > > > > viewController, > > > > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > > > > > > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie > > > > right? So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets > > > > merged > > > > in Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > > > > > > > Cagatay > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > *Sent:* Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > > > > > *To:* MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hello kito, > > > > > > > > > > you can put every extension into a "commons" module. > > > > > > > > > > I see what you're saying. I suppose the main issue is the size of > > > > > the module, and the number of perceived users. > > > > > > > > > > To be honest, I think Tomahawk is a better place for it, since > > > > > Tomahawk contains a lot of stuff that belongs in the JSF core, like > > > > > some > > > > > basic validators. > > > > > > > > > > orchestra is about conversations and persistence > > > > > and > > > > > sev-en is about validation (simple and cross-component validation) > > > > > at the moment i'm not aware of the difference. > > > > > > > > > > it might be ok to put specific sev-en annotation modules into the > > > > > commons module (as i said - they are independent of the sev-en core). > >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi *, my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on its own. regards, Martin On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > Iam just suggesting a standard way of validation that we are going to > implement in the next days which can be useful later for JSF or EJB > projects. > This project is currently a subproject of the apache commons project. > IMHO if sev-en can support JSR-303 annotations, this will be great! > Thank you. > > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello, > > > > (the sev-en core doesn't provide specific annotations. > > maybe there will be an annotation module to support jsr 303 annotations, > which might act as adapter for the project you mentioned.) > > > > or are you suggesting to publish sev-en as a sub-project of the commons > project? > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/7, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > Hi All... > > > > > > There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - > http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we started it as an Apache > Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the svn > repo of the new project: > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 > > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ > > > > > > IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation requirements, > like JSF or EJB specific validations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > hello cagatay, > > > > > > > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > > > > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > > > > > > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > > > > however, it isn't alone out there. > > > > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > > > > > > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > > > > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > > > > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the core > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and > Simon couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like viewController, > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > > > > > > > > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a goodie > right? So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets merged > in Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Cagatay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 2:47 PM > > > > > > To: MyFaces Development; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hello kito, > > > > > > > > > > > > you can put every ext
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
> > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > its own. +1 for that if Orchestra team has interest, -1 for a submodule. On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:38 AM, Martin Marinschek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi *, > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > its own. > > regards, > > Martin > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hello, > > Iam just suggesting a standard way of validation that we are going to > > implement in the next days which can be useful later for JSF or EJB > > projects. > > This project is currently a subproject of the apache commons project. > > IMHO if sev-en can support JSR-303 annotations, this will be great! > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > hello, > > > > > > (the sev-en core doesn't provide specific annotations. > > > maybe there will be an annotation module to support jsr 303 > annotations, > > which might act as adapter for the project you mentioned.) > > > > > > or are you suggesting to publish sev-en as a sub-project of the > commons > > project? > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/7, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All... > > > > > > > > There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - > > http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we started it as an Apache > > Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the > svn > > repo of the new project: > > > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 > > > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 > > > > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ > > > > > > > > IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation > requirements, > > like JSF or EJB specific validations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > hello cagatay, > > > > > > > > > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > > > > > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > > > > > > > > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > > > > > however, it isn't alone out there. > > > > > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > > > > > > > > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > > > > > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > > > > > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the > core > > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Orchestra is kinda out of it's original scope, Mario and > > Simon couldn't resist and add many cool useful features like > viewController, > > dynaForm and more that are not related to conversations and persistence. > > > > > > > > > > > > Orchestra is becoming our alternative to seam, sev-en is a > goodie > > right? So rather than a seperate project, I've no problem if it gets > merged > > in Orchestra, just my 2 cents, it's up to further discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cagatay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi, if it makes any sense using sev-en in an app without using also orchestra (i did know very few of both) -1 for include into orchestra. Regards, Volker 2008/4/9, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > > its own. > > +1 for that if Orchestra team has interest, -1 for a submodule. > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:38 AM, Martin Marinschek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi *, > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > > its own. > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > Iam just suggesting a standard way of validation that we are going to > > > implement in the next days which can be useful later for JSF or EJB > > > projects. > > > This project is currently a subproject of the apache commons project. > > > IMHO if sev-en can support JSR-303 annotations, this will be great! > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > hello, > > > > > > > > (the sev-en core doesn't provide specific annotations. > > > > maybe there will be an annotation module to support jsr 303 > annotations, > > > which might act as adapter for the project you mentioned.) > > > > > > > > or are you suggesting to publish sev-en as a sub-project of the > commons > > > project? > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/7, Hazem Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All... > > > > > > > > > > There is already an ongoing activity to implement JSR#303 - > > > http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=303 - and we > started it as an Apache > > > Commons Sandbox project. Following links for discussion threads and the > svn > > > repo of the new project: > > > > > > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102655 > > > > > > > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/102683 > > > > > > > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/sandbox/validator2/ > > > > > > > > > > IMHO this will be a good base for more specific validation > requirements, > > > like JSF or EJB specific validations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Gerhard Petracek > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > hello cagatay, > > > > > > > > > > > > i see your point. however, i don't agree. to keep it short: > > > > > > i don't like the idea to restrict sev-en to orchestra. > > > > > > > > > > > > don't get me wrong - orchestra is really great! > > > > > > however, it isn't alone out there. > > > > > > (e.g. spring web flow and much more) > > > > > > > > > > > > if sev-en is a goody or not is in the eye of the beholder. > > > > > > i would say e.g.: the possible jpa support is a goody of sev-en. > > > > > > (the core of sev-en doesn't depend on jpa or something else. the > core > > > depends only on the jsf api and at the moment on commons-logging ;)) > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/4, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > &
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
I think it's a good idea to add sev-en as an orchestra subproject. Would be nice to have a common place for documentation, common release plans & release numbers. regards, Thomas On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > > its own. > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra > Team" only one. > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details of > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > converter wrapper stuff ... > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > Ciao, > Mario > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi! > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > its own. > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra Team" only one. Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details of how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of converter wrapper stuff ... Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate then. Such a project could include sev-en too. Ciao, Mario
RE: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
I think Mario has made some very good points... > -Original Message- > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > To: MyFaces Development > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > Hi! > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > > its own. > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra > Team" only one. > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details > of > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > converter wrapper stuff ... > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > Ciao, > Mario
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a little infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't become it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it impacts expectations on the renderkits. Scott Kito D. Mann wrote: I think Mario has made some very good points... -Original Message- From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM To: MyFaces Development Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations Hi! my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on its own. First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra Team" only one. Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details of how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of converter wrapper stuff ... Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate then. Such a project could include sev-en too. Ciao, Mario
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi Gerhard, seems the community is leaning towards a new submodule (Cagatay's -1 is only one of the many votes). But - as Mario said - let the code speak first! regards, Martin On 4/9/08, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a little > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't > become it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it impacts > expectations on the renderkits. > > Scott > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > >> To: MyFaces Development > >> Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > >> > >> Hi! > >> > >>> my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > >>> orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > >>> separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > >>> its own. > >>> > >>> > >> First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really > >> should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra > >> Team" only one. > >> > >> Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > >> If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might > >> make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > >> developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > >> However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > >> Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > >> > >> If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > >> place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > >> submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details > >> of > >> how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > >> converter wrapper stuff ... > >> > >> Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development > >> environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > >> development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > >> then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > >> > >> Ciao, > >> Mario > >> > > > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
true! On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a little > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't become > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it impacts > expectations on the renderkits. > > Scott > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if the > > > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just be a > > > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand on > > > > its own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, really > > > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a "Orchestra > > > Team" only one. > > > > > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > > > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably might > > > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > > > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > > > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > > > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > > > > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > > > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > > > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical details > > > of > > > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > > > converter wrapper stuff ... > > > > > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a development > > > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > > > development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > > > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > > > > > Ciao, > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello, as mentioned: sev-en started as feasibility study. so there are some topics i haven't cared about so far. to keep it short: i would like to finish some tasks before we discuss details. it's much more efficient to discuss the intermediate result after this process. (at the moment the concepts of the core are pretty stable.) in the mean time i would suggest to open a vote concerning the myfaces sub-project topic. furthermore, some of you don't like the original/internal code-name. is it enough to omit the hyphen? (sev-en -> seven) or do you have some fancy names in mind? regards, gerhard 2008/4/10, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > true! > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a little > > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't > become > > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it impacts > > expectations on the renderkits. > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if > the > > > > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just > be a > > > > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand > on > > > > > its own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, > really > > > > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a > "Orchestra > > > > Team" only one. > > > > > > > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > > > > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably > might > > > > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > > > > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > > > > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > > > > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > > > > > > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > > > > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > > > > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical > details > > > > of > > > > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > > > > converter wrapper stuff ... > > > > > > > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a > development > > > > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > > > > development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > > > > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > > > > > > > Ciao, > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
Hi Gerhard, let's start a vote _after_ we have discussed the code - just give us a link to a zip-file with the code in it somewhere. regards, Martin On 4/11/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello, > > as mentioned: sev-en started as feasibility study. so there are some topics > i haven't cared about so far. > to keep it short: i would like to finish some tasks before we discuss > details. it's much more efficient to discuss the intermediate result after > this process. > > (at the moment the concepts of the core are pretty stable.) > > in the mean time i would suggest to open a vote concerning the myfaces > sub-project topic. > > furthermore, some of you don't like the original/internal code-name. > is it enough to omit the hyphen? > (sev-en -> seven) > or do you have some fancy names in mind? > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/10, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > true! > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a little > > > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't > > become > > > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > > > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > > > > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it impacts > > > expectations on the renderkits. > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > > > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > > > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, if > > the > > > > > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should just > > be a > > > > > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to stand > > on > > > > > > its own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, > > really > > > > > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a > > "Orchestra > > > > > Team" only one. > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > > > > > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably > > might > > > > > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > > > > > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > > > > > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro Orchestra: > > > > > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > > > > > > > > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the best > > > > > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be a > > > > > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical > > details > > > > > of > > > > > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot of > > > > > converter wrapper stuff ... > > > > > > > > > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a > > development > > > > > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > > > > > development of any-range-sized applications would be more approriate > > > > > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > > > > > > > > > Ciao, > > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
ok - i'll upload it within the next view days. regards, gerhard 2008/4/11, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi Gerhard, > > let's start a vote _after_ we have discussed the code - just give us a > link to a zip-file with the code in it somewhere. > > regards, > > > Martin > > > On 4/11/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hello, > > > > as mentioned: sev-en started as feasibility study. so there are some > topics > > i haven't cared about so far. > > to keep it short: i would like to finish some tasks before we discuss > > details. it's much more efficient to discuss the intermediate result > after > > this process. > > > > (at the moment the concepts of the core are pretty stable.) > > > > in the mean time i would suggest to open a vote concerning the myfaces > > sub-project topic. > > > > furthermore, some of you don't like the original/internal code-name. > > is it enough to omit the hyphen? > > (sev-en -> seven) > > or do you have some fancy names in mind? > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > 2008/4/10, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > true! > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a > little > > > > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't > > > become > > > > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > > > > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > > > > > > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it > impacts > > > > expectations on the renderkits. > > > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > > > > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of orchestra, > if > > > the > > > > > > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should > just > > > be a > > > > > > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to > stand > > > on > > > > > > > its own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it really, > > > really > > > > > > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a > > > "Orchestra > > > > > > Team" only one. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position Orchestra. > > > > > > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it probably > > > might > > > > > > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for the > > > > > > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > > > > > > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro > Orchestra: > > > > > > Being a lightweight Conversation-Centric Library. > > > > > > > > > > > > If, we could add it as sub-module to Orchestra, but I think the > best > > > > > > place for sev-en (would like to see a new name anyway) is to be > a > > > > > > submodule of MyFaces. But first I'd like to see the technical > > > details > > > > > > of > > > > > > how the sev-en core works. e.g. in the examples I've seen a lot > of > > > > > > converter wrapper stuff ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Building an official MyFaces Maven Artifact which bootup a > > > development > > > > > > environment (MyFaces Fullstack) with what we think on need for > > > > > > development of any-range-sized applications would be more > approriate > > > > > > then. Such a project could include sev-en too. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ciao, > > > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > further stuff: > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
ok - i'll upload it within the next few days. should i also provide a list with the main todo's? regards, gerhard 2008/4/11, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > ok - i'll upload it within the next view days. > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/11, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Hi Gerhard, > > > > let's start a vote _after_ we have discussed the code - just give us a > > link to a zip-file with the code in it somewhere. > > > > regards, > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > On 4/11/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello, > > > > > > as mentioned: sev-en started as feasibility study. so there are some > > topics > > > i haven't cared about so far. > > > to keep it short: i would like to finish some tasks before we discuss > > > details. it's much more efficient to discuss the intermediate result > > after > > > this process. > > > > > > (at the moment the concepts of the core are pretty stable.) > > > > > > in the mean time i would suggest to open a vote concerning the myfaces > > > sub-project topic. > > > > > > furthermore, some of you don't like the original/internal code-name. > > > is it enough to omit the hyphen? > > > (sev-en -> seven) > > > or do you have some fancy names in mind? > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/10, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > true! > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be a > > little > > > > > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en couldn't > > > > become > > > > > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > > > > > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > > > > > > > > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it > > impacts > > > > > expectations on the renderkits. > > > > > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 AM > > > > > > > To: MyFaces Development > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my position on this is we could make sev-en part of > > orchestra, if > > > > the > > > > > > > > orchestra crew really, really wants it. If not, this should > > just > > > > be a > > > > > > > > separate sub-module in MyFaces. It is interesting enough to > > stand > > > > on > > > > > > > > its own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, Orchestra is part of the MyFaces community, so it > > really, > > > > really > > > > > > > should be a decision the MyFaces community felt, and not a > > > > "Orchestra > > > > > > > Team" only one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, I think this is a question on how we position > > Orchestra. > > > > > > > If it is a strong position against JBoss Seam, then it > > probably > > > > might > > > > > > > make sense to include everything which makes life easier for > > the > > > > > > > developer into Orchestra - just as Seam tries to do. > > > > > > > However, then we loose one of the strongest arguments pro > > Orchestra: > > > > > > > Being a lightweight Conversation-Ce
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
the source code of the preview is available at [1]. the main differences compared to the first version are: - the generated adapters aren't required any more! (they are available as optional fallback solution. normally you don't need them.) - more optional extensibility - different approaches are unified however, there's still some work to do. especially testing with different scenarios, documentation and so on. (todo's outside the core: e.g.: more annotations and/or annotation modules) at the moment i reconsider, if it makes sense to split annotation modules up. e.g. it might be nice to have modules with annotations themselves and a separated one with the strategies. it's comparable with the principle of api/impl. i would suggest to discuss such details later on! as mentioned within my blog: sev-en is available for jsf 1.1 and 1.2. the source code, which is available at [1], is the trunk for jsf 1.1. my private repository also contains trunk_12 please keep in mind: sev-en is just the 'core' module! (the current version doesn't require the adapter module and the core is independent of the annotations module -> the core is independent of specific annotations!) what do you think about the mentioned vote? regards, gerhard [1] http://people.apache.org/~gpetracek/sev-en_preview.html 2008/4/11, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > ok - i'll upload it within the next few days. > > should i also provide a list with the main todo's? > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/4/11, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > ok - i'll upload it within the next view days. > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > > > > > 2008/4/11, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > Hi Gerhard, > > > > > > let's start a vote _after_ we have discussed the code - just give us a > > > link to a zip-file with the code in it somewhere. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > On 4/11/08, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > hello, > > > > > > > > as mentioned: sev-en started as feasibility study. so there are some > > > topics > > > > i haven't cared about so far. > > > > to keep it short: i would like to finish some tasks before we > > > discuss > > > > details. it's much more efficient to discuss the intermediate result > > > after > > > > this process. > > > > > > > > (at the moment the concepts of the core are pretty stable.) > > > > > > > > in the mean time i would suggest to open a vote concerning the > > > myfaces > > > > sub-project topic. > > > > > > > > furthermore, some of you don't like the original/internal code-name. > > > > is it enough to omit the hyphen? > > > > (sev-en -> seven) > > > > or do you have some fancy names in mind? > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > gerhard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/4/10, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > true! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > I think so too. Having a sub-project of a sub-project might be > > > a little > > > > > > infrastructure heavy, there is nothing to say that Sev-en > > > couldn't > > > > > become > > > > > > it's own MyFaces subproject that's intended to be used in a > > > > > > MyFaces/Orchestra type environment. > > > > > > > > > > > > I also agree it should my a MyFaces wide decision because it > > > impacts > > > > > > expectations on the renderkits. > > > > > > > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kito D. Mann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Mario has made some very good points... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > > > > From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > Sent
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hi, have you noticed this? http://www.javalid.org/ -M On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > some central features: > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > - support for jpa based validation > - zero configuration > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much more) > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
hello matthias, yes - i had a look at it some weeks ago. i don't like the architecture of it. sev-en is much more extensible. furthermore, javalid executes validation after the "update model values" phase,... -> -1 for javalid regards, gerhard 2008/6/4 Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > hi, > > have you noticed this? > > http://www.javalid.org/ > > -M > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. > > > > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! > > > > some central features: > > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) > > - support for jpa based validation > > - zero configuration > > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) > > > > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much > more) > > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. > > > > what's your opinion about this extension? > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > > > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html > > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html > > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [proposal] jsf validation with annotations
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Gerhard Petracek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hello matthias, > > yes - i had a look at it some weeks ago. i don't like the architecture of > it. > sev-en is much more extensible. > furthermore, javalid executes validation after the "update model values" > phase,... oh, ok. > -> -1 for javalid +1 ;) > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2008/6/4 Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> hi, >> >> have you noticed this? >> >> http://www.javalid.org/ >> >> -M >> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Gerhard Petracek >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > sev-en is a new jsf-extension. >> > >> > sev-en allows jsf validation with annotations! >> > >> > some central features: >> > - cross-component validation (including cross-entity validation) >> > - support for jpa based validation >> > - zero configuration >> > - extensible (e.g. custom annotations) >> > >> > you will find some previews (descriptions [1], examples [2] and much >> > more) >> > at the sev-en section [3] of my new open source blog. >> > >> > what's your opinion about this extension? >> > >> > regards, >> > gerhard >> > >> > [1] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-jsf-extension.html >> > [2] http://os890.blogspot.com/2008/04/sev-en-preview-short-example.html >> > [3] http://os890.blogspot.com/search/label/sev-en >> > >> > -- >> > >> > http://www.irian.at >> > >> > Your JSF powerhouse - >> > JSF Consulting, Development and >> > Courses in English and German >> > >> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> further stuff: >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
