JSF in Planet Roller (long)

[Dave-401]

I decided to try something new and develop the simple and small standalone
Planet Roller UI with JSF and specifically the Apache MyFaces implementation.
It took the better part of a weekend to work through the learning curve and
I'm happy with the results, but since I did this on my own without discussion,
let me explain my reasoning and my experience, starting with the first question
that probably comes to mind.

I hope to convince you to not object to keeping Planet's JSF UI in
place and to consider what comes next for the Roller web UI.


Why not just use Struts 1.x?

I'm tired of Struts and the cumbersome way we use Struts in Roller.
For example, this is what's involved in one form:

- Markup POJOs with XDoclet so we can generate form bean class
- Extend form bean to add extra fields, override copyTo and copyFrom logic
- Create page model object to make data available to JSP page
- Create Tiles configs for new page and action
- Create global forwards for action and pages in XDoclet merge file
- Create Struts dispatch action class to handle GET and POST of form
- Markup Struts action so XDoclet can generate struts-config.xml

The result is too many classes, too much boiler-plate code and too many
moving parts. It's slowing us down. Plus, lots has changed in the world of
Java web development since I started working on Roller in 2001 -- I wanted to
try learn and try something new.


But why try JSF?

I'm not trying JSF because Sun told me too -- in fact, I still haven't told my
manager which UI tech I'm using in Planet Roller (hi Rama). I like what I
learned about JSF from Geary and Horstmann's book and I like the momentum.
It's the most hyped web framework, as Raible says [1], but that's actually a
side-effect of a very good thing -- its part of Java EE 5 and all the
major Java
vendors are developing and marketing tools to support it including
JBoss/Red Hat, IBM, Oracle and of course Sun. Plus, we've got MyFaces,
a complete JSF implementation right here at Apache [3].

The fact that JSF is component based is a plus in my mind and I think we're
going to see lots of component development, see for example ADF Faces [2]
(now at Apache), and JMaki [4], which brings AJAX components to the world
of JSF.

Following are some notes about my experiences with JSF in Planet Roller.


What I like about JSF

- Less code! Take a look at the new form classes under the package
  org.apache.roller.planet.ui.forms.

- No need for the three form, action and page model classes we normally create
  for a Roller JSP page. Compare the new JSF form classes with the old Struts
  Actions for Planet in org.apache.roller.ui.admin.struts.actions.

- No need for XDoclet form generation. Personally, I'd like to eliminate
  XDoclet from Roller -- or at least from the web tier. I think it creates
  more problems than it solves. And, no more need for the weird form-bean based
  save() logic on HibernatePersistenceStrategy.

- Validation is simple and very easy to extend. We don't make much use of
  Struts validation in Roller, in part because it was too complex for my taste.
  But I found it very easy to add custom validation logic to JSF.


Problems encountered with JSF

- Everything is a POST -- serious RESTafarian buzzkill. I was able to
  work around this problem by using a simple little filter for GET requests,
  one which loads objects based on request information.

- Bugs, e.g. the pesky commandLink in datatable problem that won't go away.
  I've been able to work around this problem with a little JavaScript.

- Problems mixing JSF and JSTL tags. Care is required. I've been able to
  use JSTL for simple conditional logic, but not much more.


But JSF sucks!

There is a pretty strong JSF sucks contingent, at least inside the blogopshere
echo-chamber in which I live. Let's talk about that. A common criticism of JSF
is that it's too complex because it is designed to support the needs of IDEs
and not hand-coders. That was not my experience. I found JSF very simple
and easy to use -- less code and less config than I'm used to.

One of the critics of JSF is our own Matt Raible. Matt is on the JSF expert
group and has experience with what he calls the top five Java web frameworks.
His pick for the best web framework is WebWork, which is the foundation for
Struts 2 AKA "Struts Action" -- just released this week [5] by the way.

Struts Action is still an action framework, and personally I prefer
components -- and the growing number of JSF components, but because JSF is
compatible with Struts Action, you can mix them both in one application.
This gives you the best of both worlds, as Don says [6]:

    "You can use a page with JSF components and have complete access
    to the JSF lifecycle. This even supports JSF components that post
    back to themselves or add PhaseListeners to provide advanced AJAX
    support. No more "everything is a POST", and even faces-config.xml isn't
    required since the Action instance is available to the JSF EL bindings."

    "The bottom line is Struts Action 2 proves it is possible for the
    action-based and component-based frameworks to work together, and
    application developers no longer have to choose one or the other
    exclusively. They can make the decision on a page-to-page basis
    according to its particular requirements. Enough of these
    "web framework wars", and let's move on to more interesting problems. :)"

I especially like the "No more 'everything is a POST'" part.

So, by using JSF we can benefit from component-based framework with strong
momemtum and industry support and, if we need it, we still have the option
of using Struts Action for things not well suited to JSF.

Have I convinced anybody? Does anybody object to keeping JSF and MyFaces in the
Planet Roller webapp?

- Dave

PS. I added some screenshots of the UI to the proposal page on the wiki:
<http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_Modular_Planet>


References

[1] RE: What Web Application framework should you use?
http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=re_what_web_application_framework

[2] ADF Faces
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/htdocs/partners/addins/exchange/jsf/index.html

[3] Apache MyFaces JSF implementation
http://myfaces.apache.org/

[4] JMaki AJAX components
http://ajax.dev.java.net/

[5] Struts 2.0.0 Available
http://jroller.com/page/TedHusted?entry=struts_2_0_0_available

[6] Unification: Struts Action and JSF
http://jroller.com/page/mrdon?entry=unification_struts_action_and_jsf

[Matt Raible-3]

On 9/27/06, Dave <snoopdave@...> wrote:

>
> I decided to try something new and develop the simple and small standalone
> Planet Roller UI with JSF and specifically the Apache MyFaces
> implementation.
> It took the better part of a weekend to work through the learning curve
> and
> I'm happy with the results, but since I did this on my own without
> discussion,
> let me explain my reasoning and my experience, starting with the first
> question
> that probably comes to mind.
>
> I hope to convince you to not object to keeping Planet's JSF UI in
> place and to consider what comes next for the Roller web UI.
>
>
> Why not just use Struts 1.x?
>
> I'm tired of Struts and the cumbersome way we use Struts in Roller.
> For example, this is what's involved in one form:
>
> - Markup POJOs with XDoclet so we can generate form bean class
> - Extend form bean to add extra fields, override copyTo and copyFrom logic
> - Create page model object to make data available to JSP page
> - Create Tiles configs for new page and action
> - Create global forwards for action and pages in XDoclet merge file
> - Create Struts dispatch action class to handle GET and POST of form
> - Markup Struts action so XDoclet can generate struts-config.xml
>
> The result is too many classes, too much boiler-plate code and too many
> moving parts. It's slowing us down. Plus, lots has changed in the world of
> Java web development since I started working on Roller in 2001 -- I wanted
> to
> try learn and try something new.
>
>
> But why try JSF?
>
> I'm not trying JSF because Sun told me too -- in fact, I still haven't
> told my
> manager which UI tech I'm using in Planet Roller (hi Rama). I like what I
> learned about JSF from Geary and Horstmann's book and I like the momentum.
> It's the most hyped web framework, as Raible says [1], but that's actually
> a
> side-effect of a very good thing -- its part of Java EE 5 and all the
> major Java
> vendors are developing and marketing tools to support it including
> JBoss/Red Hat, IBM, Oracle and of course Sun. Plus, we've got MyFaces,
> a complete JSF implementation right here at Apache [3].
>
> The fact that JSF is component based is a plus in my mind and I think
> we're
> going to see lots of component development, see for example ADF Faces [2]
> (now at Apache), and JMaki [4], which brings AJAX components to the world
> of JSF.
>
> Following are some notes about my experiences with JSF in Planet Roller.
>
>
> What I like about JSF
>
> - Less code! Take a look at the new form classes under the package
>   org.apache.roller.planet.ui.forms.
>
> - No need for the three form, action and page model classes we normally
> create
>   for a Roller JSP page. Compare the new JSF form classes with the old
> Struts
>   Actions for Planet in org.apache.roller.ui.admin.struts.actions.
>
> - No need for XDoclet form generation. Personally, I'd like to eliminate
>   XDoclet from Roller -- or at least from the web tier. I think it creates
>   more problems than it solves. And, no more need for the weird form-bean
> based
>   save() logic on HibernatePersistenceStrategy.
>
> - Validation is simple and very easy to extend. We don't make much use of
>   Struts validation in Roller, in part because it was too complex for my
> taste.
>   But I found it very easy to add custom validation logic to JSF.
>
>
> Problems encountered with JSF
>
> - Everything is a POST -- serious RESTafarian buzzkill. I was able to
>   work around this problem by using a simple little filter for GET
> requests,
>   one which loads objects based on request information.
>
> - Bugs, e.g. the pesky commandLink in datatable problem that won't go
> away.
>   I've been able to work around this problem with a little JavaScript.
>
> - Problems mixing JSF and JSTL tags. Care is required. I've been able to
>   use JSTL for simple conditional logic, but not much more.
>
>
> But JSF sucks!
>
> There is a pretty strong JSF sucks contingent, at least inside the
> blogopshere
> echo-chamber in which I live. Let's talk about that. A common criticism of
> JSF
> is that it's too complex because it is designed to support the needs of
> IDEs
> and not hand-coders. That was not my experience. I found JSF very simple
> and easy to use -- less code and less config than I'm used to.
>
> One of the critics of JSF is our own Matt Raible. Matt is on the JSF
> expert
> group and has experience with what he calls the top five Java web
> frameworks.
> His pick for the best web framework is WebWork, which is the foundation
> for
> Struts 2 AKA "Struts Action" -- just released this week [5] by the way.
>
> Struts Action is still an action framework, and personally I prefer
> components -- and the growing number of JSF components, but because JSF is
> compatible with Struts Action, you can mix them both in one application.
> This gives you the best of both worlds, as Don says [6]:
>
>     "You can use a page with JSF components and have complete access
>     to the JSF lifecycle. This even supports JSF components that post
>     back to themselves or add PhaseListeners to provide advanced AJAX
>     support. No more "everything is a POST", and even faces-config.xmlisn't
>     required since the Action instance is available to the JSF EL
> bindings."
>
>     "The bottom line is Struts Action 2 proves it is possible for the
>     action-based and component-based frameworks to work together, and
>     application developers no longer have to choose one or the other
>     exclusively. They can make the decision on a page-to-page basis
>     according to its particular requirements. Enough of these
>     "web framework wars", and let's move on to more interesting problems.
> :)"
>
> I especially like the "No more 'everything is a POST'" part.
>
> So, by using JSF we can benefit from component-based framework with strong
> momemtum and industry support and, if we need it, we still have the option
> of using Struts Action for things not well suited to JSF.
>
> Have I convinced anybody? Does anybody object to keeping JSF and MyFaces
> in the
> Planet Roller webapp?

Almost anything is better than Struts 1.x, particularly Struts 2, Spring
MVC, Tapestry and JSF.  JSF 1.1 is pretty pitiful with JSP.  I generally
recommend that folks using JSF 1.1 should use Facelets.  I also think Shale
might be a good solution with it's JavaScript remoting and Clay templates.
I think bare-bones JSF should be thought of similar to Servlets - a good API
to build on top of, but kindof painful to use standalone.  It's much better
in JSF 1.2, but GlassFish is currently the only server that supports
JSP 2.1(which uses the new unified EL).

So no, I don't object.  How many people on the team have JSF experience?
It's pretty easy to learn if you're familiar with Struts - and /much/ easier
to develop with.

Matt

- Dave

>
> PS. I added some screenshots of the UI to the proposal page on the wiki:
> <http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_Modular_Planet>
>
>
> References
>
> [1] RE: What Web Application framework should you use?
> http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=re_what_web_application_framework
>
> [2] ADF Faces
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/htdocs/partners/addins/exchange/jsf/index.html
>
> [3] Apache MyFaces JSF implementation
> http://myfaces.apache.org/
>
> [4] JMaki AJAX components
> http://ajax.dev.java.net/
>
> [5] Struts 2.0.0 Available
> http://jroller.com/page/TedHusted?entry=struts_2_0_0_available
>
> [6] Unification: Struts Action and JSF
> http://jroller.com/page/mrdon?entry=unification_struts_action_and_jsf
>

[Allen Gilliland-3]

Dave wrote:

> I decided to try something new and develop the simple and small standalone
> Planet Roller UI with JSF and specifically the Apache MyFaces
> implementation.
> It took the better part of a weekend to work through the learning curve and
> I'm happy with the results, but since I did this on my own without
> discussion,
> let me explain my reasoning and my experience, starting with the first
> question
> that probably comes to mind.
>
> I hope to convince you to not object to keeping Planet's JSF UI in
> place and to consider what comes next for the Roller web UI.

Thanks for sending this out.  I had just seen your commit a few minutes
ago and was going to ask about this.

>
>
> Why not just use Struts 1.x?
>
> I'm tired of Struts and the cumbersome way we use Struts in Roller.
> For example, this is what's involved in one form:
>
> - Markup POJOs with XDoclet so we can generate form bean class
> - Extend form bean to add extra fields, override copyTo and copyFrom logic
> - Create page model object to make data available to JSP page
> - Create Tiles configs for new page and action
> - Create global forwards for action and pages in XDoclet merge file
> - Create Struts dispatch action class to handle GET and POST of form
> - Markup Struts action so XDoclet can generate struts-config.xml
>
> The result is too many classes, too much boiler-plate code and too many
> moving parts. It's slowing us down. Plus, lots has changed in the world of
> Java web development since I started working on Roller in 2001 -- I
> wanted to
> try learn and try something new.

I'm not sure all of those issues can be blamed on Struts 1.x itself.  I
think some of the XDoclet stuff and the way we try and use our own page
model class are Roller specific issues, but I agree with your sentiment.
  I have been grumbling about the way Roller uses struts for a long
time, so I have no problem with moving past our current Struts 1.x stuff.

>
>
> But why try JSF?
>
> I'm not trying JSF because Sun told me too -- in fact, I still haven't
> told my
> manager which UI tech I'm using in Planet Roller (hi Rama). I like what I
> learned about JSF from Geary and Horstmann's book and I like the momentum.
> It's the most hyped web framework, as Raible says [1], but that's
> actually a
> side-effect of a very good thing -- its part of Java EE 5 and all the
> major Java
> vendors are developing and marketing tools to support it including
> JBoss/Red Hat, IBM, Oracle and of course Sun. Plus, we've got MyFaces,
> a complete JSF implementation right here at Apache [3].
>
> The fact that JSF is component based is a plus in my mind and I think we're
> going to see lots of component development, see for example ADF Faces [2]
> (now at Apache), and JMaki [4], which brings AJAX components to the world
> of JSF.
>
> Following are some notes about my experiences with JSF in Planet Roller.
>
>
> What I like about JSF
>
> - Less code! Take a look at the new form classes under the package
>  org.apache.roller.planet.ui.forms.
>
> - No need for the three form, action and page model classes we normally
> create
>  for a Roller JSP page. Compare the new JSF form classes with the old
> Struts
>  Actions for Planet in org.apache.roller.ui.admin.struts.actions.
>
> - No need for XDoclet form generation. Personally, I'd like to eliminate
>  XDoclet from Roller -- or at least from the web tier. I think it creates
>  more problems than it solves. And, no more need for the weird form-bean
> based
>  save() logic on HibernatePersistenceStrategy.
>
> - Validation is simple and very easy to extend. We don't make much use of
>  Struts validation in Roller, in part because it was too complex for my
> taste.
>  But I found it very easy to add custom validation logic to JSF.
>
>
> Problems encountered with JSF
>
> - Everything is a POST -- serious RESTafarian buzzkill. I was able to
>  work around this problem by using a simple little filter for GET requests,
>  one which loads objects based on request information.
>
> - Bugs, e.g. the pesky commandLink in datatable problem that won't go away.
>  I've been able to work around this problem with a little JavaScript.
>
> - Problems mixing JSF and JSTL tags. Care is required. I've been able to
>  use JSTL for simple conditional logic, but not much more.

I don't have any experience with JSF so I couldn't really comment on any
of that, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't at least a little bit of an
improvement over Struts 1.x.

I did look at the new forms stuff as you suggested and the
LoadableFormsFilter definitely looks hacky to me :(  I can't say that I
fully understand the problem, but it sounds like you already had to work
around an unfortunate limitation in the JSF architecture.

I'm also not particularly encouraged about having to work around
problems using javascript and having to abandon jstl in favor of a pure
jsf taglibrary, but that's not such a big deal.

>
>
> But JSF sucks!
>
> There is a pretty strong JSF sucks contingent, at least inside the
> blogopshere
> echo-chamber in which I live. Let's talk about that. A common criticism
> of JSF
> is that it's too complex because it is designed to support the needs of
> IDEs
> and not hand-coders. That was not my experience. I found JSF very simple
> and easy to use -- less code and less config than I'm used to.
>
> One of the critics of JSF is our own Matt Raible. Matt is on the JSF expert
> group and has experience with what he calls the top five Java web
> frameworks.
> His pick for the best web framework is WebWork, which is the foundation for
> Struts 2 AKA "Struts Action" -- just released this week [5] by the way.
>
> Struts Action is still an action framework, and personally I prefer
> components -- and the growing number of JSF components, but because JSF is
> compatible with Struts Action, you can mix them both in one application.
> This gives you the best of both worlds, as Don says [6]:
>
>    "You can use a page with JSF components and have complete access
>    to the JSF lifecycle. This even supports JSF components that post
>    back to themselves or add PhaseListeners to provide advanced AJAX
>    support. No more "everything is a POST", and even faces-config.xml isn't
>    required since the Action instance is available to the JSF EL bindings."
>
>    "The bottom line is Struts Action 2 proves it is possible for the
>    action-based and component-based frameworks to work together, and
>    application developers no longer have to choose one or the other
>    exclusively. They can make the decision on a page-to-page basis
>    according to its particular requirements. Enough of these
>    "web framework wars", and let's move on to more interesting problems.
> :)"
>
> I especially like the "No more 'everything is a POST'" part.
>
> So, by using JSF we can benefit from component-based framework with strong
> momemtum and industry support and, if we need it, we still have the option
> of using Struts Action for things not well suited to JSF.
>
> Have I convinced anybody? Does anybody object to keeping JSF and MyFaces
> in the
> Planet Roller webapp?

If I had to vote I would just be a +0 because I don't have experience
comparing all the various web frameworks and it doesn't really matter
that much to me anyways.  It's fine with me if you want to keep it.

I do think it would be good to have more of a discussion about this
though, rather than just assuming that we are now going to migrate
everything to JSF over time.  I would definitely like to see more info
around why (and others) think JSF is better than SAF 2 or other options.

-- Allen

>
> - Dave
>
> PS. I added some screenshots of the UI to the proposal page on the wiki:
> <http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_Modular_Planet>
>
>
> References
>
> [1] RE: What Web Application framework should you use?
> http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=re_what_web_application_framework
>
> [2] ADF Faces
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/htdocs/partners/addins/exchange/jsf/index.html 
>
>
> [3] Apache MyFaces JSF implementation
> http://myfaces.apache.org/
>
> [4] JMaki AJAX components
> http://ajax.dev.java.net/
>
> [5] Struts 2.0.0 Available
> http://jroller.com/page/TedHusted?entry=struts_2_0_0_available
>
> [6] Unification: Struts Action and JSF
> http://jroller.com/page/mrdon?entry=unification_struts_action_and_jsf

[Jeffrey Blattman]

dave,

+1, no objection here.

one benefit of JSF you did not mention is that there's a JSF portlet
bridge ... so theoretically, any JSF app can be sucked into and used in
the portlet world. this could be really important for us <--- pure self
interest.

the client app i've written to consume of APP and the admin protocol is
a JSF app ...

i don't have a lot of experience w/ some of the alternatives, so my +1
should be taken w/ a grain of salt ...
 
Dave wrote:

> I decided to try something new and develop the simple and small
> standalone
> Planet Roller UI with JSF and specifically the Apache MyFaces
> implementation.
> It took the better part of a weekend to work through the learning
> curve and
> I'm happy with the results, but since I did this on my own without
> discussion,
> let me explain my reasoning and my experience, starting with the first
> question
> that probably comes to mind.
>
> I hope to convince you to not object to keeping Planet's JSF UI in
> place and to consider what comes next for the Roller web UI.
>
>
> Why not just use Struts 1.x?
>
> I'm tired of Struts and the cumbersome way we use Struts in Roller.
> For example, this is what's involved in one form:
>
> - Markup POJOs with XDoclet so we can generate form bean class
> - Extend form bean to add extra fields, override copyTo and copyFrom
> logic
> - Create page model object to make data available to JSP page
> - Create Tiles configs for new page and action
> - Create global forwards for action and pages in XDoclet merge file
> - Create Struts dispatch action class to handle GET and POST of form
> - Markup Struts action so XDoclet can generate struts-config.xml
>
> The result is too many classes, too much boiler-plate code and too many
> moving parts. It's slowing us down. Plus, lots has changed in the
> world of
> Java web development since I started working on Roller in 2001 -- I
> wanted to
> try learn and try something new.
>
>
> But why try JSF?
>
> I'm not trying JSF because Sun told me too -- in fact, I still haven't
> told my
> manager which UI tech I'm using in Planet Roller (hi Rama). I like what I
> learned about JSF from Geary and Horstmann's book and I like the
> momentum.
> It's the most hyped web framework, as Raible says [1], but that's
> actually a
> side-effect of a very good thing -- its part of Java EE 5 and all the
> major Java
> vendors are developing and marketing tools to support it including
> JBoss/Red Hat, IBM, Oracle and of course Sun. Plus, we've got MyFaces,
> a complete JSF implementation right here at Apache [3].
>
> The fact that JSF is component based is a plus in my mind and I think
> we're
> going to see lots of component development, see for example ADF Faces [2]
> (now at Apache), and JMaki [4], which brings AJAX components to the world
> of JSF.
>
> Following are some notes about my experiences with JSF in Planet Roller.
>
>
> What I like about JSF
>
> - Less code! Take a look at the new form classes under the package
>  org.apache.roller.planet.ui.forms.
>
> - No need for the three form, action and page model classes we
> normally create
>  for a Roller JSP page. Compare the new JSF form classes with the old
> Struts
>  Actions for Planet in org.apache.roller.ui.admin.struts.actions.
>
> - No need for XDoclet form generation. Personally, I'd like to eliminate
>  XDoclet from Roller -- or at least from the web tier. I think it creates
>  more problems than it solves. And, no more need for the weird
> form-bean based
>  save() logic on HibernatePersistenceStrategy.
>
> - Validation is simple and very easy to extend. We don't make much use of
>  Struts validation in Roller, in part because it was too complex for
> my taste.
>  But I found it very easy to add custom validation logic to JSF.
>
>
> Problems encountered with JSF
>
> - Everything is a POST -- serious RESTafarian buzzkill. I was able to
>  work around this problem by using a simple little filter for GET
> requests,
>  one which loads objects based on request information.
>
> - Bugs, e.g. the pesky commandLink in datatable problem that won't go
> away.
>  I've been able to work around this problem with a little JavaScript.
>
> - Problems mixing JSF and JSTL tags. Care is required. I've been able to
>  use JSTL for simple conditional logic, but not much more.
>
>
> But JSF sucks!
>
> There is a pretty strong JSF sucks contingent, at least inside the
> blogopshere
> echo-chamber in which I live. Let's talk about that. A common
> criticism of JSF
> is that it's too complex because it is designed to support the needs
> of IDEs
> and not hand-coders. That was not my experience. I found JSF very simple
> and easy to use -- less code and less config than I'm used to.
>
> One of the critics of JSF is our own Matt Raible. Matt is on the JSF
> expert
> group and has experience with what he calls the top five Java web
> frameworks.
> His pick for the best web framework is WebWork, which is the
> foundation for
> Struts 2 AKA "Struts Action" -- just released this week [5] by the way.
>
> Struts Action is still an action framework, and personally I prefer
> components -- and the growing number of JSF components, but because
> JSF is
> compatible with Struts Action, you can mix them both in one application.
> This gives you the best of both worlds, as Don says [6]:
>
>    "You can use a page with JSF components and have complete access
>    to the JSF lifecycle. This even supports JSF components that post
>    back to themselves or add PhaseListeners to provide advanced AJAX
>    support. No more "everything is a POST", and even faces-config.xml
> isn't
>    required since the Action instance is available to the JSF EL
> bindings."
>
>    "The bottom line is Struts Action 2 proves it is possible for the
>    action-based and component-based frameworks to work together, and
>    application developers no longer have to choose one or the other
>    exclusively. They can make the decision on a page-to-page basis
>    according to its particular requirements. Enough of these
>    "web framework wars", and let's move on to more interesting
> problems. :)"
>
> I especially like the "No more 'everything is a POST'" part.
>
> So, by using JSF we can benefit from component-based framework with
> strong
> momemtum and industry support and, if we need it, we still have the
> option
> of using Struts Action for things not well suited to JSF.
>
> Have I convinced anybody? Does anybody object to keeping JSF and
> MyFaces in the
> Planet Roller webapp?
>
> - Dave
>
> PS. I added some screenshots of the UI to the proposal page on the wiki:
> <http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_Modular_Planet>
>
>
> References
>
> [1] RE: What Web Application framework should you use?
> http://raibledesigns.com/page/rd?entry=re_what_web_application_framework
>
> [2] ADF Faces
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/htdocs/partners/addins/exchange/jsf/index.html 
>
>
> [3] Apache MyFaces JSF implementation
> http://myfaces.apache.org/
>
> [4] JMaki AJAX components
> http://ajax.dev.java.net/
>
> [5] Struts 2.0.0 Available
> http://jroller.com/page/TedHusted?entry=struts_2_0_0_available
>
> [6] Unification: Struts Action and JSF
> http://jroller.com/page/mrdon?entry=unification_struts_action_and_jsf