As most technologies in Java EE are pluggable, it may set a precedence
for including multiple providers of other technologies. I would stick to
the one-implementation-per-technology rule, and not ship alternative
implementation. It shows our confidence and commitment to integrating
the best components into WildFly.
For MyFaces fans, one option is to create external (outside WildFly)
community effort to enable alternative JSF impl, maybe in the form of a
patch that can applied to WildFly. From a user's perspective, this
shouldn't be too different than shipping multiple impls, as both
approaches need some sort of configuration any way.
Just my 2 cents.
Cheng
On 7/8/13 1:31 PM, ssilvert(a)redhat.com wrote:
Ever since we switched from MyFaces to Mojarra I've incurred the
wrath
of MyFaces fans. Regardless of the relative quality of each
implementation, we have stuck with Mojarra because it always implements
the latest spec long before MyFaces. Now is no exception as Mojarra
fully supports JSF 2.2 and MyFaces 2.2 is incomplete.
However, with Multi-JSF in place, it is now trivial to ship both
implementations and allow the end user to choose which one they like best.
Any thoughts on this?
Stan
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev