[seam-dev] Seam 2.1 branch

[Pete Muir]

On 22 Apr 2009, at 04:41, Dan Allen wrote:

>
>
> I have not done that yet (since I don't need that many dependencies  
> yet given what I have so far). Shane, please feel free to hack this  
> file up as needed. I just had to have it in place to do anything w/  
> the examples.
>
> The good news is that the seam-booking.war can be built and deployed  
> to JBoss AS 5. It doesn't really do anything yet except show the  
> home page. Tomorrow I can dive in and start to get a screen or two  
> going.
>
> I would then like to research getting Maven to deploy the  
> examples...only falling back to Ant if I am just fighting with it  
> too much.
>
> I've done this twice and it's a nightmare ;-)
>
> I was fortunate to have good fortune on my first try. I got the  
> booking example to deploy with no trouble using the jboss plugin.  
> The downside is that I've only got the packaged EAR going so far,  
> not the exploded EAR. I'm going to see if I can build quickly on  
> what I have.

Yeah, we need to support exploded, Tomcat/Jetty etc. as well.

>
>
>
> Couple of questions so far.
>
> 1. Can I use the standard src/main/webapp for the web assets? The  
> webbeans build uses WebContent which I guess is for JBDS. But I  
> think I can get JBDS to work with src/main/webapp just fine. I'm  
> also open to the folder named "view". I really dislike the folder  
> name WebContent.
>
> I think we should go with the WTP standard here.
>
> I really don't like this idea. I want to stick to the Maven standard  
> src/main/webapp or use view. WebContext is a stupid folder name and  
> I've always hated that WTP wouldn't change it to something less  
> lame. Besides, the location is completely configurable in WTP  
> anyway, so it doesn't really care what the folder is called. I've  
> also seen Maven plugins choke when the convention is not followed.  
> So I'm going to hack on src/main/webapp for a couple of days and  
> just see how it pans out.
>

Ok.

>
> 2. We are setting JSF to version 2.0.0.PR2, right? I guess later if  
> we need to we can think about how to enable JSF 1.2 in the build,  
> but I'm assuming we are just not worrying about that yet. So I can  
> use JSF 2 features (and knock out legacy Facelets), correct?
>
> I don't see a need to support JSF 1.2
>
> All I was looking for was a decision. Fine with me. The only  
> downside is that I have to use JSF 2 from SVN because the current  
> PR2 doesn't have any of the Red Hat additions. But SVN is also not  
> quite working right, so we are just going to have to hobble along  
> for a short while.
>
>
>
>
> 3. Should booking be an EAR or a WAR (or both)? I know I will need a  
> Stateful session bean so with JBoss AS 5 that still requires use of  
> an EAR I believe. I seem to have answered my own question. Just  
> verify.
>
> EAR.
>
> Done.
>
> -Dan
>
> -- 
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan
>
> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than  
> a week,
> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
> caught in the spam filters.  Please don't hesitate to resend a  
> message if
> you feel that it did not reach my attention.

--
Pete Muir
http://www.seamframework.org
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Pete