[jsr-314-open] getting behind CDI

[David Geary]

Spring also has Spring WebFlow and SpringFaces, which provide conversation
scope.


david

2009/12/21 Werner Punz <werner.punz at gmail.com>

>
>
> 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/20091221/54791e3e/attachment.html