3:44 p.m.
If I were given the choice, I would choose Errai + REST over pure JS +
REST. Try maintaining a 100,000+ line javascript app over multiple teams.
Good luck!
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Luca Masini <
luca.masini.mailing.list(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Pete I think that Thomas is talking about the marshalling protocol
used by
Errai, you can use its own or one that is "jackson compatible".
I prefere the latter because I use JAX-RS services that produces JSON with
Jackson.
Ciao.
2012/12/19 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
> Jackson is a marshalling library for XML and JSON. Errai is a framework
> for building apps that execute in the browser. I'm not sure you can replace
> one with the other.
>
> On 19 Dec 2012, at 13:55, A-ON Puls Referenz-User wrote:
>
> > Sorry I was not up to the point, I am talking of current implementation
> of Aerogear scaffold of Forge.
> >
> > The question is: should Aerogear scaffold continue with Jackson or
> migrate to Errai?
> >
> > Thomas
> >
> > ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -----
> > Von: "Luca Masini"
> > Erhalten: 19.12.2012 13:03
> > An: "forge-dev List"
> >
> > Hi Thomas, I didn't understand very well the question in your poll.
> >
> > Anyway when you talk about the marshalling, do you mean an annotation
> that know how to manage how to serialize persistent collection ??
> >
> > In a way, are you talking about the problem that frameworks like Gilead
> try to solve ??
> >
> >
> > 2012/12/18 Thomas Frühbeck < fruehbeck(a)aon.at >
> > Hi,
> >
> > during experiments extending a generated aerogear application I found
> that
> > - the current integration of JSON via Jackson is kinda creative hack
> > - not easily portable to recent releases of Jackson (see above)
> > - does not make use of annotation driven UI/ser/deserializ. processing
> >
> > During my investigations on upgrade possibilities to modern Jackson I
> realized, that Errai is a very powerful and complete framework well worth
> being featured
> > in Forge's scaffold.
> > As I am not really deep into Jackson/JSON/Rest yet I would like to ask
> for your opinion on this.
> >
> > Another question regarding use of annotations in a scaffold:
> > Especially regarding modern Errai/Jackson annotations are an easy means
> to control the UI / (De-)Serialization, e.g. when working with entities, I
> think it is
> > necessary to use persistence-based entity instantiation before
> deserialization, to avoid loss of data if an incomplete entity is
> desrialized and persisted by
> > merge().
> >
> > Do you think it acceptable to actively insert annotations into entity
> code - possibly by a scaffold command like "scaffold applyAnnotations"?
> >
> > In my opinion this could provide interesting best practice propagation
> for novices like me.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> > _______________________________________________
> > forge-dev mailing list
> > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ****************************************
> > http://www.lucamasini.net
> > http://twitter.com/lmasini
> > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/luca-masini/7/10/2b9
> > ****************************************
> > _______________________________________________
> > forge-dev mailing list
> > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
--
****************************************
http://www.lucamasini.net
http://twitter.com/lmasini
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/luca-masini/7/10/2b9
****************************************
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."