[jsr-314-open] getting behind CDI

[Werner Punz]

On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Ganesh <ganesh at j4fry.org> wrote:

> The most essential and basic feature I miss is the conversation scope which
> is covered by weldx. Spring is only making a promise for 3.1 here.
>
> Myfaces has Orchestra which delivers it for Spring, I don´t think it is
really bound to MyFaces at all since the JSF specific part is very small and
probably does not touch anything MyFaces internal.

Orchestra has been there almost for 2 years now, and it is overlooked by
many who think this is a MyFaces only thing.
(In fact to my knowledge it works even outside of JSF on plain servlet
level)

So conversation support for Spring is there and has been very reliable for
ages now (Kudos to Mario Ivankovitch and Simon Kitching for pulling it off),
but not inside Spring itself which as Ganesh has pointed out will come in
3.1!


Werner


Conversation delimiters are set programmatically in weldx which I consider
> not
> ideal. I'd wish having annotation/XML based navigation rules that cover
> conversations and contained beans. Maybe we can cover this feature in the
> future?
>
> Best regards,
> Ganesh
> David Geary schrieb:
>
>> I've found this a fascinating thread. I didn't know that Spring 3.0 had
>> many of the same features as CDI.
>>
>> So I can intelligently recommend either Spring 3 or CDI, I'd like to know
>> what are the advantages and disadvantages of each. I read the comments on
>> TSS (<http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=58858#330454>),
>> and from that thread I surmised that Spring 3.0 and CDI were similar, but I
>> don't understand the differences. I appreciate, btw, the much more cordial
>> discussion Dan and Jeremy have had on this list.
>>
>> Dan and Jeremy, it'd be great if you guys could let us know what the pros
>> and cons of each are.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> david
>>
>> 2009/12/19 Dan Allen <dan.j.allen at gmail.com <mailto:dan.j.allen at gmail.com
>> >>
>>
>>
>>    Jeremy,
>>
>>        Perhaps one of the first things we should do is update the "Get
>>        Started" on www.javaserverfaces.org
>>        <http://www.javaserverfaces.org> to show both options.  This
>>
>>        would require both a Weld archetype (which I think you've been
>>        working on?) and one for Spring 3 (I could work on providing one).
>>
>>
>>    We must have been on the same wavelength because that's exactly what
>>    I was working on while you were writing back. I've split the page
>>    into three parts, explaining that there are three "packages" so to
>>    speak. I've left the Spring section open. If you want to fill that
>>    in with an archetype of your choice, that would be great. I've
>>    granted you edit access. (You have to tolerate the painfully slow
>>    Google Sites editor. It takes some patience to tame the bullets).
>>
>>    We can clean up some of the text throughout the page, I was just
>>    throwing down some structure quickly.
>>
>>
>>             Agreed, in this particular example, I would not recommend
>>>            this approach.  What about @ViewScoped though?  That's one
>>>            of the more useful pieces of JSF 2 in my opinion.  I don't
>>>            believe there is an out-of-the-box CDI-equivalent, right?
>>>             I would assume it's not hard to implement a custom
>>>            @ViewScoped that CDI would recognize?
>>>
>>>
>>>        There isn't a CDI equivalent of @ViewScoped in the CDI spec,
>>>        but Weld/Seam will be providing a portable extension,
>>>        hopefully getting weaved back into a revision of the spec. We
>>>        shouldn't have to revert to @javax.faces.ManagedBean just to
>>>        get this feature.
>>>
>>
>>        Right, and we can provide a similar extension in Spring, but I'm
>>        wondering if we can find some sort of shared approach...
>>
>>        ...
>>
>>        To be fair, we aren't yet providing any out-of-the-box
>>        implementations of JSR-330's @Scope other than the @Singleton
>>        that is required by by the spec.  Maybe this is an opportunity
>>        for further collaboration, outside of the scope of the EG.  It
>>        would be really cool if we could establish a single common and
>>        complete set of scope annotations as portable extensions usable
>>        in both Seam and Spring...I'm not entirely certain yet how
>>        technically feasible this would be...just something to think about.
>>
>>
>>    Sounds like an action item for collaboration in 2010!
>>
>>
>>         I'm glad that we can communicate with friendly exchanges and I
>>>        always look forward to getting your perspective. Frankly, I
>>>        think that's what defines this EG, as Andy so elegantly
>>>        pointed out in his blog.
>>>
>>
>>        Indeed, it is quite refreshing to be able to have such
>>        discussions without things degenerating into TSS-style
>>        bickering.  As can seen by taking a look at some of the
>>        arguments on the JSR-330 list, for example, EG's are not by rule
>>        free of such nonsense.  I am thankful for your open-ness and for
>>        Ed and everyone else's roles in fostering such an environment,
>>        and look forward to seeing it continue.
>>
>>
>>    +1
>>
>>    On that note, Happy Holidays and New Year. I'm looking forward to 2010!
>>
>>    -Dan
>>
>>    --    Dan Allen
>>    Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>>    Registered Linux User #231597
>>
>>    http://mojavelinux.com
>>    http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>>    http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20091221/ff69356c/attachment.html