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

[jsr372-experts] Re: [jsr372-experts mirror] Re: New anti-JSF Article

From: Kito Mann <kito.mann_at_virtua.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:44:45 -0500

So, it's clear that we all think the article is pretty shallow and pretty
much wrong on many counts. Is it worth saying anything about it? Does
anyone read TSS?

___

Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE, and Liferay training and
consulting
Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io
<http://knowesis.io/web/webcomponents> - fresh Web Components info
+1 203-998-0403

* Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: *http://
<http://blogs.jsfcentral.com/JSFNewscast/>enterprisejavanews.com
<http://ww.enterprisejavanews.com>*


On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Neil Griffin <neil.griffin_at_portletfaces.org
> wrote:

> The article does not provide any evidence to support the claim "Another
> key problem with JSF is that it doesn't work well with other standard Java
> libraries with the Portal API being one”.
>
> JSF portlet bridges have existed in open source for over 10 years, and the
> requirements for a JSF 1.2 + Portlet 2.0 bridge was standardized with JSR
> 329.
>
> While it is true that there were no JSF 2.x + Portlet 2.0 standards from
> the JCP, JBoss Portlet Bridge and Liferay Faces Bridge were developed as
> open source and have been available since 2012.
>
> Now that JSR 378 is underway, we will have standardized support for JSF
> 2.2 + Portlet 3.0.
>
> — Neil
>
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 2:45 PM, Bauke Scholtz <balusc_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Article gave me too much the impression they had nothing exciting to write
> and just tried to attract traffic by reviving an old debate. Only the
> "Primitive Ajax Support" part is new to me, most likely triggered by SPA
> hype these days. Well, my answer to that would be
> http://stackoverflow.com/q/7108668/157882
>
> Cheers, B
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Kito Mann <kito.mann_at_virtua.com> wrote:
>
>> It's really a poorly written article; the points are very weak.
>> Especially the point about it "lacking flexibility". I have worked on quite
>> a few projects, and never once has there been a need for another warning
>> level. That's a really bad example; the fact that JSF is flexible is one of
>> the #1 reasons to use it.
>>
>> It looks to me like Cameron's thinking about JSF has evolved. He wrote
>> in a previous tutoria
>> <http://www.theserverside.com/tutorial/Creating-a-single-page-inteface-SPI-with-JSF-Facelets-Ajax-and-HTML5>l
>> about how to build single-page apps with JSF, and that book.
>>
>> At any rate, does anyone actually read TheServerSide.com
>> <http://theserverside.com> anymore?
>>
>> ___
>>
>> Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
>> Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE, and Liferay training
>> and consulting
>> Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
>> JSFCentral.com <http://jsfcentral.com/> | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io
>> <http://knowesis.io/web/webcomponents> - fresh Web Components info
>> +1 203-998-0403
>>
>> * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: *http://
>> <http://blogs.jsfcentral.com/JSFNewscast/>enterprisejavanews.com
>> <http://ww.enterprisejavanews.com/>*
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Cagatay Civici <cagatay.civici_at_gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I came across a new anti-JSF article.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.theserverside.com/feature/Five-drawbacks-to-choosing-JSF-as-your-web-application-framework
>>>
>>> Sadly, I cannot find a way to comment.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Cagatay Civici
>>> PrimeFaces Lead
>>> PrimeTek Informatics
>>> www.primefaces.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>