Re: [faces-dev] Modularizing Faces

[Thomas Andraschko <tandraschko@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

we don't even have a real scope for Flash. Also ConversationScope is inside CDI, not JSF.

Also isn't Flash something like RedirectScope?

Really, please don't get me wrong here, but i don't see a big benefit here.

We should put our scarce resources into something like this: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/faces-api/issues/1499

This is something that prevents users since JSF early days to correctly use validators inside ui:repeat.

If we need an analysis of which JSF scopes/features are used, we should just do a poll.

I also have like 10+ customers applications here and could do a simple analysis of used scopes.

I can however say: Flash, Conversation, Flow are almost unused.

Request, Session, View are really heavily used; some uses DeltaSpike WindowScope for a "session/tab" usecase.

Best regards,

Thomas

Virenfrei. www.avast.com

Am Mi., 20. Jan. 2021 um 16:46 Uhr schrieb Manfred Riem <m_riem@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

Hi Rudy,

 

A couple of things come to mind.

 

1. Each scope would only be included when the customer actually wants to use it
2. If you want to deliver an alternative implementation you can do so easily
3. It would make sure the scope is only using public Faces / CDI APIs
4. We could see how much each scope is used which helps to figure out where we should put our scarce resources go forward

 

And on your question of compliance that is a TCK testing aspect of things, which does not limit allowing this modular approach.

 

Thanks!

 

Kind regards,

Manfred Riem

 

From: faces-dev <faces-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Rudy De Busscher
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 6:02 AM
To: faces developer discussions <faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [faces-dev] Modularizing Faces

 

What is the benefit of having each scope in a separate module when they all need to be available to become a compliant implementation?

 

Rudy

 

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 22:06, Manfred Riem <m_riem@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Arjan,

 

One could imagine a separate module for each of the following:

 

FlashScoped

ViewScoped

ConverationScoped

ClientWindowScoped (annotation is not there yet)

RedirectScoped (annotation is not there yet)

 

Thanks!

 

Kind regards,

Manfred Riem

 

From: faces-dev <faces-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of arjan tijms
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 12:46 PM
To: faces developer discussions <faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [faces-dev] Modularizing Faces

 

Hi,

 

Great idea! Any proposal for the modules we should have?

 

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:33 PM Manfred Riem <m_riem@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

 

Now that modules are becoming more and more mainstream is it time to consider create a modular Faces runtime?

 

Let me know your thoughts!

 

Thanks!

 

Kind regards,
Manfred Riem

 

_______________________________________________
faces-dev mailing list
faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/faces-dev

_______________________________________________
faces-dev mailing list
faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/faces-dev

_______________________________________________
faces-dev mailing list
faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/faces-dev