[forge-dev] Several architectural styles in Forge (was Wondering about coding convention)

[Antonio Goncalves]

2013/10/21 Vineet Reynolds Pereira <vpereira at redhat.com>

>
>
> IMHO we should not be putting persistence concerns in either the JSF beans
> or the REST resources.
> They should go into a service or a repository or whatever data access
> pattern is suitable for the context.
> This is where we lack any standardization at the moment, and it would be
> better to not limit this exercise to improving the conventions alone, but
> also the architecture.
>


Vineet, this is the topic I'm writing about at the moment. To be honest, I
quite like to have persistent concerns in JSF beans and REST for certain
projects... but not all, and that's where I thing Forge should give some
choices. What I'm writing is about having 3 different architectural styles
that could be resume like this (using CLI) :

*Current* (generates JSF/REST from entities) :
jsf-scaffold-from-entity
rest-scaffold-from-entity

*EJB Centric* (add a service layer to deal with persistence) :
ejb-scaffold-from-entity
jsf-scaffold-from-ejb
rest-scaffold-from-ejb

*REST centric* (the JSF backing beans use the REST endpoint, using JAX-RS
2.0 Client API) :
rest-scaffold-from-entity
jsf-scaffold-from-rest


I will let you know when the post is written, it will be clearer

-- 
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion

Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> |
Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
 | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris
JUG<http://www.parisjug.org/>
 | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20131021/de5df3a7/attachment.html