Hi,
Sorry for jumping into the topic but I have a question regarding
compatibility issue.
Does it mean that using FacesBean instead of JSF 2.0 PSS can introduce
possible component incompatibility with another JSF 2 libraries like
RichFaces, PrimeFaces, IceFaces?. Or did I miss something?
My
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Luka Surija l...@iytim.hr wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for jumping into the topic but I have a question regarding
compatibility issue.
Does it mean that using FacesBean instead of JSF 2.0 PSS can introduce
possible component incompatibility with another JSF 2 libraries
Matthias,
Is there a way to support the standard APIs but still uses FacesBean internally?
---
Kito D. Mann | twitter: kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Virtua, Inc. | http://www.virtua.com | JSF/Java EE training and consulting
http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info |
On 12/09/2009 01:22 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Luka Surijal...@iytim.hr wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for jumping into the topic but I have a question regarding
compatibility issue.
Does it mean that using FacesBean instead of JSF 2.0 PSS can introduce
possible
Luka, what project are you working on?
---
Kito D. Mann | twitter: kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Virtua, Inc. | http://www.virtua.com | JSF/Java EE training and consulting
http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info |
twitter: jsfcentral
+1 203-404-4848 x3
JSF Summit
Hi Kito,
Working name of the project is CloudOffice.
Set of services for small companies. (hosted IMAP mail, web hosting with
our CMS and web application as Business Suite).
This business suite contains
- collaboration module (knowledge base, forum, journaling, todo-s,
calendar, ticketing and
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote:
lemme put that into our nice MoinMoin wiki.
we can add stuff in the future there as well.
here:
http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/Trinidad_FacesBean_and_PartialStateSaving
feel free to add numbers on performance etc
Hi,
Andy is at a conference, I can try to talk to him about this next week.
Thanks,
Gabrielle
Martin Koci wrote:
Hi,
regarding component.getAttributes() vs. bean.getProperty() performance:
do you have info under which circumstances is that difference
noticeable? I do some profiling on two
Hey,
I'm just asking this out of curiosity, so no offense intended. ;-)
I see a lot of JSF 2.0 related activity in Trinidad and I was
wondering, why not leverage the JSF 2.0 code in MyFaces Core?
Are there (legacy) reasons to keep the UIX classes and not replace
them (maybe partially) with their
quick comment...
one reason to keep that structure is that the components (trinidad) offer
more APIs and behavior.
Also, not sure if we really want to go with JSF 2.0's partial state saving.
Looks like FacesBean has still some advantages.
Gabrielle, can you provide some data here ?
-Matthias
Hi,
Our implementation of facesBean in 1.2 already supported
partialStateSaving, and for JSF 2 it's now a partialStateHolder
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1630
One reason is FacesBean uses propertyKeys, which allow additional
information like capabilities.
Beyond that Andy
Hi,
regarding component.getAttributes() vs. bean.getProperty() performance:
do you have info under which circumstances is that difference
noticeable? I do some profiling on two apps: the first one is
trinidad12/jsf12 based and the second is JSF2 based. In both cases I
have same view but JSF2
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1622?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Max Starets updated TRINIDAD-1622:
--
Status: Patch Available (was: Open)
JSF 2.0: Need to provide
JSF 2.0: Need to provide ExternalContext.getResource() override to call into
the PageResolver when a JSP page is executed
-
Key: TRINIDAD-1622
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1622?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matthias Weßendorf updated TRINIDAD-1622:
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 2.0.0-core
Assignee: Matthias
to put in things like the visitor
pattern;
see this patch from Blake:
Is there any official effort for migrating Trinidad to JSF 2.0? We can
join it and provide more patches with time.
yes, there is a plan to have a Trinidad 2.0 that covers JSF 2.0. The base
for that is, as you
-internal renderkit to JSF 2.0 at the
moment.Trinidad 1.2.X is not compatible with JSF 2.0 so I created some
patches.
Not yet; correct. However, we started to put in things like the visitor
pattern;
see this patch from Blake:
Is there any official effort for migrating Trinidad to JSF 2.0? We
Hi,
we are migrating our company-internal renderkit to JSF 2.0 at the
moment.Trinidad 1.2.X is not compatible with JSF 2.0 so I created some
patches.
Is there any official effort for migrating Trinidad to JSF 2.0? We can
join it and provide more patches with time.
Regards,
Martin
.
Not yet; correct. However, we started to put in things like the visitor
pattern;
see this patch from Blake:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1368
Is there any official effort for migrating Trinidad to JSF 2.0? We can
join it and provide more patches with time.
yes
like the visitor pattern;
see this patch from Blake:
Is there any official effort for migrating Trinidad to JSF 2.0? We can
join it and provide more patches with time.
yes, there is a plan to have a Trinidad 2.0 that covers JSF 2.0. The base
for that is, as you already figured, the 1.2.x line
20 matches
Mail list logo
