On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
wrote:
> Hold on. I don't like you making the assumptions about me kind of
> dismissing that the conversation about the intersection between JAX-RS and
> JSF should take place. Neither I like you quoting single lines from my
> earlier comments which loses the context.
I'm sorry if I misquoted you. I just tried to keep the amounts of quoted
text to a minimal.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think you're saying here is that you
>> don't care whether JSF will use JAX-RS as a foundation or not?
>>
>
> You got it wrong. Let me clarify: I do not mind if Java EE developers
> working with JAX-RS will start using JSF for the MVC work or not once the
> JAX-RS MVC work is done, and presumably JSF becoming a de-facto 'consumer'
> of JAX-RS MVC.
Okay, that's indeed what I thought you were saying. Thanks for the
clarification though ;)
> That is not important for me. What is important for me is that I or other
> users can work with JAX-RS MVC without having to depend on JSF
So this is the part I guess we just have different opinions about. That
doesn't matter of course, since if we all agreed with each other from the
get-go there wouldn't be much discussion needed, would there? Let's agree
that we disagree on this specific part.
To sum up I propose to take the following into account:
>>
>> 1. Just "MVC" is too broad
>> 2. Use "MVC push"/"action oriented" for what Spring MVC does
>> 3. Use "MVC pull" for what JSF does
>>
>> Would that make things more clear?
>>
>
> AFAIK we have not started a technical discussion yet and as such I'm not
> sure why are we talking about these technical distinctions here
>
Well, the general discussion about this has started (as we're having this
discussion now). I don't think it's necessary for the discussion to become
deeply technical in order to make this subtle but important distinction.
In much of the communication towards the user, e.g. via the Java EE 8
survey, it's now communicated that Java EE 8 will either get "an MVC
framework" or will get "an additional MVC framework". For existing Java EE
users this may sound confusing. You can either interpret it as saying that
JSF is thus not an MVC framework,or wonder why two of the same things are
needed.
The simple answer is that JSF IS an MVC framework too, but of a different
kind, and that the new work is not about an identical thing to JSF but a
different kind of MVC. Claiming MVC to be solely about the kind of MVC that
Spring MVC does is IMHO not correct.
Much of this confusion can be avoided by consistently talking about MVC
push or action oriented. Even without going into the technical details I
think we can agree that everything that's planned for JAX-RS MVC is about
the push / action oriented variety.
Regards,
Arjan