ViewExpiredException is a JSF 1.2 feature. RichFaces 3.1.x keep JSF 1.1 compatibility, so, it follow to jsf 1.1 specifications. To support ViewExpiredException, we need a switch dependencies to JSF 1.2, as far as no such class in the JSF 1.1 API. Pete Muir wrote: > http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/RF-2294 > > This is one is affecting SeamFramework.org and is urgent. We need to > get a fix into the 3.1.x branch. > > Thanks guys :) > >

Really, it's not a bug. Different JSF specifications have a different behaviors for a this case. So, RichFaces classes should be JSF 1.2 compatible for a ViewExpiredExceptions. SUN RI check VievHandler/StateManager instances at the restore view phase. For a JSF 1.2, no view is created by framework, but, for a JSF 1.1 classes, they should call ViewHandler.createView method , for an empty UIViewRoot creation. I'll chech implementation code for a correct support of the all cases. This is not a problem for a RichFaces 3.2. development branch, so it already targeted for a JSF 1.2 Pete Muir wrote: > But we're not using a4j/rf components, we are just submitting a h:form > with a h:commandButton - so the behaviour should *not* deviate from > the underlying JSF impl. > > And actually, if you do some debugging, you'll see that the problem > isn't that RF needs to throw a ViewExpiredException, but that, in the > updateModel method of UIInput without RichFaces the viewRoot is null, > so the RI throws the exception, with RichFaces, it isn't null, so the > exception isn't thrown. > > I don't know if this is a bug in RF or in the JSF RI - if you need me > to chase this down I guess that I can spend time on it but I would > prefer not to. > > Thanks > > On 19/02/2008, Alexandr Smirnov <asmirnov(a)exadel.com&gt; wrote: > >> ViewExpiredException is a JSF 1.2 feature. RichFaces 3.1.x keep JSF 1.1 >> compatibility, so, it follow to jsf 1.1 specifications. >> To support ViewExpiredException, we need a switch dependencies to JSF >> 1.2, as far as no such class in the JSF 1.1 API. >> Pete Muir wrote: >> >>> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/RF-2294 >>> >>> This is one is affecting SeamFramework.org and is urgent. We need to >>> get a fix into the 3.1.x branch. >>> >>> Thanks guys :) >>> >>> >>> >> > > >

You can start to test at any time with 3.2.0 nightly builds. The QA period (releasing CRs) will start at the beginning of March. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete Muir" <pmuir(a)bleepbleep.org.uk&gt; To: "Alexandr Smirnov" <asmirnov(a)exadel.com&gt; Cc: "Sergey Smirnov" <sim(a)exadel.com>; <seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>; <richfaces-exadel(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 10:19 AM Subject: Re: ViewExpiredException > I disagree. I don't think a component library should change the > behaviour of JSF when it's components are not in use on the page. > > Ok, so when will there be a 3.2.0.BETA release that we can start > testing with Seam? > > On 20/02/2008, Alexandr Smirnov <asmirnov(a)exadel.com&gt; wrote: >> Really, it's not a bug. Different JSF specifications have a >> different >> behaviors for a this case. So, RichFaces classes should be JSF 1.2 >> compatible for a ViewExpiredExceptions. >> SUN RI check VievHandler/StateManager instances at the restore view >> phase. For a JSF 1.2, no view is created by framework, but, for >> a JSF >> 1.1 classes, they should call ViewHandler.createView method , >> for an >> empty UIViewRoot creation. >> I'll chech implementation code for a correct support of the all >> cases. >> This is not a problem for a RichFaces 3.2. development branch, >> so it >> already targeted for a JSF 1.2 >> >> >> Pete Muir wrote: >> > But we're not using a4j/rf components, we are just submitting >> a h:form >> > with a h:commandButton - so the behaviour should *not* deviate >> from >> > the underlying JSF impl. >> > >> > And actually, if you do some debugging, you'll see that the >> problem >> > isn't that RF needs to throw a ViewExpiredException, but that, >> in the >> > updateModel method of UIInput without RichFaces the viewRoot >> is null, >> > so the RI throws the exception, with RichFaces, it isn't null, >> so the >> > exception isn't thrown. >> > >> > I don't know if this is a bug in RF or in the JSF RI - if you >> need me >> > to chase this down I guess that I can spend time on it but I >> would >> > prefer not to. >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > On 19/02/2008, Alexandr Smirnov <asmirnov(a)exadel.com&gt; wrote: >> > >> >> ViewExpiredException is a JSF 1.2 feature. RichFaces 3.1.x >> keep JSF 1.1 >> >> compatibility, so, it follow to jsf 1.1 specifications. >> >> To support ViewExpiredException, we need a switch >> dependencies to JSF >> >> 1.2, as far as no such class in the JSF 1.1 API. >> >> Pete Muir wrote: >> >> >> >>> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/RF-2294 >> >>> >> >>> This is one is affecting SeamFramework.org and is urgent. We >> need to >> >>> get a fix into the 3.1.x branch. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks guys :) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > > -- > Pete Muir > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Pete > http://www.seamframework.org _______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

On Feb 20, 2008, at 20:06 , Pete Muir wrote: > There is a big difference between nightly builds and a beta. A beta > means that you have done some basic QA on the build and made sure it > runs. And also that Alex isn't in the middle of a big refactor > (which is what happened last time I tried to use a RF 3.2 nightly) > > On 20 Feb 2008, at 18:32, Sergey Smirnov wrote: > >> You can start to test at any time with 3.2.0 nightly builds. The QA >> period (releasing CRs) will start at the beginning of March. > Sorry to interrupt you guys arguing about version numbers, but we have two production sites now that suffer from this bug. What we need is an _immediate_ fix ported to the current stable version. And I mean this week. _______________________________________________ Richfaces-exadel mailing list Richfaces-exadel(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/richfaces-exadel

On Feb 20, 2008, at 20:06 , Pete Muir wrote: > There is a big difference between nightly builds and a beta. A beta > means that you have done some basic QA on the build and made sure it > runs. And also that Alex isn't in the middle of a big refactor (which > is what happened last time I tried to use a RF 3.2 nightly) > > On 20 Feb 2008, at 18:32, Sergey Smirnov wrote: > >> You can start to test at any time with 3.2.0 nightly builds. The QA >> period (releasing CRs) will start at the beginning of March. > Sorry to interrupt you guys arguing about version numbers, but we have two production sites now that suffer from this bug. What we need is an _immediate_ fix ported to the current stable version. And I mean this week.

I think it is time we dropped support for JSF 1.1 in new versions of RichFaces. People who need to use JSF 1.1 can continue to use the current version of RichFaces. I'm sure there are many code quality issues in the Richfaces codebase that relate to the 1.1 support. So lets drop it. On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Alexandr Smirnov <asmirnov(a)exadel.com&gt; wrote: > I have got a lot of times to understand JSF 1.2 implementation code. > As I guess from code, JSF 1.2 detect ViewHandler / StateManager > version > from faces-config.xml DTD/XML schema name. We can't switch > RichFaces > 3.1.x configuration files to a JSF 1.2 format, as far as it will > completely break JSF 1.1 compatibility. > Fortunately, there is workaround for a SUN RI framework. Just put : > <context-param> > <param-name>com.sun.faces.disableVersionTracking</param-name> > <param-value>true</param-value> > </context-param> > into application web.xml. It will switch framework to a JSF 1.2 > behavior. > > > > Christian Bauer wrote: >> >> On Feb 20, 2008, at 20:06 , Pete Muir wrote: >> >>> There is a big difference between nightly builds and a beta. A beta >>> means that you have done some basic QA on the build and made >>> sure it >>> runs. And also that Alex isn't in the middle of a big refactor >>> (which >>> is what happened last time I tried to use a RF 3.2 nightly) >>> >>> On 20 Feb 2008, at 18:32, Sergey Smirnov wrote: >>> >>>> You can start to test at any time with 3.2.0 nightly builds. >>>> The QA >>>> period (releasing CRs) will start at the beginning of March. >>> >> >> Sorry to interrupt you guys arguing about version numbers, but we >> have >> two production sites now that suffer from this bug. What we need >> is an >> _immediate_ fix ported to the current stable version. And I mean >> this >> week. > > _______________________________________________ > Richfaces-exadel mailing list > Richfaces-exadel(a)redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/richfaces-exadel > -- Gavin King gavin.king(a)gmail.com http://hibernate.org http://jboss.com/products/seam http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin _______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev