On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu4242_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have send a subscribe email to sympa_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net, but it
> say the request has been sent to the list owner's for approval. I have
> been working around this topic, and I would like to contribute with my
> opinions about this, but without any action on that side, I can't do
> anything.
>
Same here.
>
> After looking the problem in deep I think we need to take some action
> on both sides. On JAX-RS, because the ideal is to put a front
> controller on top of JSF, but that needs some collaboration between
> both frameworks (in a similar way as the portlet integration works).
> In JSF, we can provide some improvements, that are just a complement
> for JSF existing programming model, but that are inspired into action
> source frameworks, and in that way, it could help users to make an
> easier integration between javascript and JSF.
>
I agree. I think making it easy and obvious how to use both JS and JAX-RS
end points or MVC/style behavior in the same app makes a lot of sense. In
modern development, there are times when you need to send JSON back and
forth even in a JSF app; currently this is easy to do with third-party
extensions like PrimeFaces, but having more flexibility would be nice.
>
> regards,
>
> Leonardo
>
> 2014-05-23 17:34 GMT+02:00 rajmahendra_at_gmail.com <rajmahendra_at_gmail.com>:
> > I am Raj from India, JUG Chennai
> https://plus.google.com/+JUGChennai/photos
> > founder and currently in Hyderabadhttp://www.meetup.com/jughyderabad/ so
> > leading JUG Hyderabad.
> >
> > Its an awesome idea We are love to be part of this new journey :)
> >
> > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 10:10:21 -0400, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen
> >> >>>>> <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com> said:
> >>
> >> SPG> I'm the spec lead for JAX-RS and Ed asked me to pop in here and
> >> SPG> invite you over to the mailto:users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net where we
> >> SPG> are planning to have our discussions. I'd like to preserve the
> >> SPG> momentum from the thread that was started by Arjan back in February
> >> SPG> [2] and had discussions through until April [3]. Our plans for
> >> SPG> JAX-RS MVC include using Facelets and JSP as well as support for
> >> SPG> Flows, ViewScope and FlashScope. Ed will have more to say about the
> >> SPG> JSF side of these things.
> >>
> >> Hi Santiago,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the invitation.
> >>
> >> This email is a call to action to those of us how contributed to the
> >> discussion of MVC on users_at_javaserverfaces-spec-public list.
> >> Specifically, I'm counting on Arjan Tijms, Adrian Gonzalez, Andy Bosch,
> >> Kito Mann, Leonardo Uribe, Manfred Riem, Neil Griffin, and
> >> Frank Caputo to strongly consider joining users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.netand
> >> continuing the discussion there.
> >>
> >> Here is a brief summary the discussion that happened on
> >> users_at_javaserverfaces-spec-public thus far, staring with Arjan's
> message
> >> on Fri, 28 Feb 2014 23:14:52 +0100 [1] and completing with Leonardo's
> >> last message on the thread at Tue, 8 Apr 2014 18:22:44 +0200 [2].
> >>
> >> Arjan pointed out the work Manfred did to build the action oriented
> >> framework on top of the JSF lifecycle mechanism.
> >>
> >> Adrian Gonzalez wrote:
> >>
> >> AG> Both JAX-RS and JSF miss some features for a MVC framework. JSF
> >> AG> misses (at least) the following stuff to support reasonably well the
> >> AG> MVC scenario :
> >>
> >> AG> 1. it doesn't support for now HTTP REST usage : HTTP PUT, POST
> >> AG> (without postback), DELETE, etc... This is a blocker.
> >>
> >> AG> 2. templating : plugging in a 3rd party templating engine easily
> >> AG> should be supported in MVC.
> >>
> >> AG> This is not the case for a component and an action based
> >> AG> framework. As I recall, Spring MVC has been built after
> >> AG> JAX-RS. Spring MVC authors didn't used JAX-RS because it was too
> >> AG> limiting for them . Perhaps someone should ask them why JAX-RS was
> >> AG> too limiting in order to lift those limitations ?
> >>
> >> AG> As for PlayFramework, I didn't used it, but here are some goodies :
> >>
> >> AG> * code reloading - a must have !
> >>
> >> AG> * view are compiled so you can use them in the controllers (to
> >> AG> populate the view and to navigate to them).
> >>
> >> AG> * view templates (and form helpers) are more succinct/understandable
> >> AG> than the same in JSP / facelets.
> >>
> >> Andy Bosch wrote:
> >>
> >> AB> Of course I am in favour of enhancing JSF according to user
> >> AB> feedback. But I am not sure whether it is a good idea to integrate
> >> AB> too much into it.
> >>
> >> Ed Burns wrote:
> >>
> >> EB> I'd like to see us extract Facelets from JSF, make it a first class
> >> EB> citizen of a JAX-RS MVC, *and* provide an Action Oriented
> >> EB> lifecycle as an alternative to the standard JSF lifecycle.
> >>
> >> Andy Bosch replied:
> >>
> >> AB> In my personal opinion it sounds good. But I often hear complaints
> >> AB> of people about the JSF lifecycle (mostly those people do not like
> >> AB> JSF at all ;-) ). Some people just don't like a complex
> >> AB> lifecycle. They prefer having a simple controller that is called
> >> AB> during an action invocation.
> >>
> >> AB> So to sum up I would say we have to carefully think about how
> >> AB> complex or easy such an lifecycle would become.
> >>
> >> Kito Mann asked:
> >>
> >> KM> Ed, what's your motivation for doing the JAX-RS route _and_ the JSF
> >> KM> route? Support action-based scenarios within JSF apps, but provide
> >> KM> JAX-RS for those who don't use JSF?
> >>
> >> Ed Burns replied:
> >>
> >> EB> Right, it's about making Facelets available outside of JSF because
> >> EB> templating is useful on its own, even without the JSF lifecycle.
> >>
> >> Leonardo Uribe responded by asserting that the combination of Spring MVC
> >> *and* JSF can be powerful, citing a blog entry and examples.
> >>
> >> LU> In other words, what the user want is in this case is:
> >>
> >> LU> - Take advantage of JSF 2 template system (facelets) and component
> >> LU> model.
> >>
> >> LU> - Don't use the JSF lifecycle and use something else that fits.
> >>
> >> Leonardo further asserts it is nonsense to take Facelets out of JSF:
> >>
> >> LU> If you take facelets out of JSF, what you are really doing is get
> >> LU> rid of JSF lifecycle, but besides that, you are not doing anything
> >> LU> else.
> >>
> >> Frank agreed with Leonardo's assertion.
> >>
> >> Though I agree with all of Leonardo's other points in his response, I
> >> disagree with this one. You are getting all the page templating from
> >> the <ui:> tag library which doesn't exist in any other server side java
> >> solution aside from Struts Tiles.
> >>
> >> Leonardo goes on to sketch a solution to allow JSF to plug more cleanly
> >> into Spring MVC, providing specific details about how the JSF lifecycle
> >> can be improved in the process.
> >>
> >> Taking another perspective on the matter, Leonardo outlines the
> >> data-only JSF lifecycle idea we've been kicking around for years and
> >> discussed at Javaland. The basic idea is to have a way for a JSF ajax
> >> request to have access to all JSF features except those relating
> >> directly to a view. This would include FacesContext, Flash, Flow, etc
> >> but would *NOT* include anything to do with a specific view. This is
> >> captured in JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-1261 and I want to pursue this
> >> in JSF 2.3.
> >>
> >> The discussion continued after Javaland. Frank sketched out how you
> >> could forward from JAX-RS to the FacesServlet today, even without Jersey
> >> MVC. Leonardo replied,
> >>
> >> LU> The only flaw I can see is using ExternalContext there is no way to
> >> LU> know when the request is a GET, a POST and so on, which is important
> >> LU> at the time to define the endpoint.
> >>
> >> LU> Now, it could be useful to have a "action source framework"
> >> LU> component. That means, an special component that work in a way that
> >> LU> everything inside it works just like any action source framework,
> >> LU> but everything outside the box still work under JSF rules.
> >>
> >> LU> So, other people has already thought the same as we are trying to do
> >> LU> and have been doing (JSF 2.2 viewAction and JSF 2.0 viewParam),
> >> LU> there are some cases where an action oriented approach with a
> >> LU> component oriented framework can coexist. In that sense, the ability
> >> LU> to define REST services inside CDI managed beans through Faces
> >> LU> Servlet seems to be important. For what? It is not hard to find
> >> LU> cases. For example, to expose information to some other app or
> >> LU> component or service that consume it as a REST service. If you have
> >> LU> a JSF webapp nothing can be simpler as define the method right on
> >> LU> the managed bean.
> >>
> >> Leonardo followed up on this with some very detailed suggestions.
> >> Leonardo, please join the discussion over on
> >> users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net. He ends by summarizing:
> >>
> >> LU> For some users who currently uses JSF at a daily basis, this problem
> >> LU> is not something important, because there is a workaround and this
> >> LU> usually suppose a small part of the whole application, so you don't
> >> LU> really spent a lot of time solving it. It is not really hard to
> >> LU> write a couple of servlets that can do the job in these cases.
> >>
> >> LU> But for some other users that are not into JSF, this is
> >> LU> important. The reason is JSF Template engine (Facelets) solves a lot
> >> LU> of problems for them. These guys usually are making applications
> >> LU> with another architectural paradigm, different to the one proposed
> >> LU> initially by JSF.
> >>
> >> Let's get moving!
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://java.net/projects/javaserverfaces-spec-public/lists/users/archive/2014-02/message/7
> >>
> >> [2]
> >>
> https://java.net/projects/javaserverfaces-spec-public/lists/users/archive/2014-04/message/6
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Thank you and regards,
> > Rajmahendra (Raj)
> > JUG Chennai Founder
> > JUG Hyderabad Lead
> > http://about.me/rajonjava/
> > http://www.twitter.com/rajonjava
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "DREAM is not what you see in sleep;
> > is the thing which does not let you sleep" - APJ Abdul Kalam
> > Do the difficult things while they are easy and do the great things while
> > they are small.
> > A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step. - Lao Tzu
>