jsr372-experts@javaserverfaces-spec-public.java.net

[jsr372-experts] Re: [JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-1056] DISCUSSION - More flexible state saving

From: manfred riem <manfred.riem_at_oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 08:31:25 -0500

Hi all,

I have closed the issue as "Incomplete" as the scope as currently stated
is too broad.

Thanks!

Kind regards,
Manfred Riem

On 9/1/15, 1:04 PM, arjan tijms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't really think this issue is too broad. "Improve state" would
> maybe be, but this issue actually just asks to make the state mode
> setting more flexible. It's now only a global setting, and the issue
> asks to give extra options, such as the ability to set it for a URL
> pattern (with the single view being an example of such pattern).
>
> The context is that "state" is one of the most complained about
> aspects of JSF. Sometimes this seems justified, sometimes maybe not
> entirely. Too often people seem to think of terms of "state is bad,
> stateless is good", and following that: "JSF has state, so JSF is
> bad".
>
> While *that* is a really broad issue, although one that would be great
> to discuss separately, 1056 is really a rather narrow aspect of this
> larger topic.
>
> Sure, it can be split into even smaller things like:
>
> * Set state save mode per view
> * Set state save mode per pattern
> * Unify pseudo state save mode "none" (stateless) with modes "server"
> and "client"
> * Make it possible to set "none" globally as well
>
> Still, I think just splitting up in separate issues without any
> context may not necessarily improve matters.
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 6:39 PM, manfred riem<manfred.riem_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> While I understand the general question behind this particular issue I would
>> like to close it as "Won't fix" as it is too broad.
>>
>> I would recommend that if we take action in this area we should come up with
>> more narrowly defined issues.
>>
>> Please response before 9/8.
>>
>> If no objections, I will take the action mentioned above.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Manfred Riem
>>