« Return to Thread: Facelets 1.2
Re: Re: Facelets 1.2
by Mike Kienenberger
::
Rate this Message:
There's a couple of minor features I'd like to see in 1.1.x (ability
to specify generic attribute names explicitly in the taglib.xml and
ability to specify method binding signatures in the taglib.xml file),
but I haven't felt motivated enough yet to sit down and create a
patch.
1.1.11 is perfectly stable for my needs and I wouldn't be motivated to
upgrade at this point in time.
On 5/31/07, Brian Smith <unobriani@...> wrote:
> I think the prevailing school of thought is Facelets 1.1.11 is quite stable
> and there is a wait and see attitude when it comes to JSF 2.0 (it may
> incorporate some or much of facelets), which would make developing a new
> version of Facelets sort of a waste of time.
>
> Just my perception
>
> -Brian
>
>
> On 5/31/07, Jason Suplizio <suplizio@...> wrote:
> > Is this thread dead? There still are several questions left unanswered -
> which adds a good deal of FUD around Facelets.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/29/07, Cracauer, Dave < dcracauer@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm going to jump into this one and share my experience with the
> project. We have some special needs from a templating system (I won't get
> into them here.) We currently have an internally modified version of Tiles
> that we use with our Struts application. We want to move our development to
> Seam/Facelets, but we need to be able to support the same functionality.
> There are a few changes to Facelets that would make this much easier. For
> example, there are a couple classes (can't recall off of the top of my head)
> that are final that we could subclass to fit our needs. I've verified this
> by building my own version of Facelets and building a small prototype. It
> would also be nice if our custom resource resolver was always called ( it
> doesn't seem to be for source tags, or when referring to a template .)
> > >
> > > Even if we didn't have these needs, I would still have concerns about
> using Facelets for our new projects. When planning a project, I like to be
> sure that if we run across a bug in the libraries we are using, it will get
> fixed. We're willing to fix bugs, but I haven't seen a process for getting
> patches applied.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately (or fortunately), since Facelets is so much better than
> JSP when using JSF, we're faced with the potential of managing our own
> internal branch of Facelets if we need to make changes. We don't like this,
> but we'll probably end up doing it.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Robinson
> [mailto:andrew.rw.robinson@...]
> > > Sent: Tue 5/29/2007 11:17 AM
> > > To: users@...
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: Facelets 1.2
> > >
> > > Why do you need facelets 1.2? What in 1.1.x doesn't fit your
> requirements?
> > >
> > > Facelets has been really stable for us and I haven't been waiting for
> > > a new release at all. In fact, I was perfectly happy on 1.0.14 until
> > > another 3rd party control required us to upgrade to 1.1.x.
> > >
> > > The only concern should be bug fix turn around time I would think and
> > > not new features. In that case I haven't seen any bug fixes in quite a
> > > while, but then again I haven't hit any of the bugs.
> > >
> > > -Andrew
> > >
> > > On 5/29/07, mike.sauer@... < mike.sauer@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For those of us evaluating facelets for recommendation for use in our
> > > > organizations it is troubling that questions such as these regarding
> the
> > > > status/roadmap of facelets go unanswered. Can anyone please provide
> some
> > > > reassurance and updates?
> > > >
> > > > >On 5/22/07, Jason Suplizio <suplizio@...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >I need to know that as well (even a ballpark). We're putting a
> timeline
> > > > >together for facelets adoption and this is very important to us.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >On 5/22/07, Ian Springer <ian.springer@...> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hello Jacob,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What new features are planned for Facelets 1.2 and is there an
> estimate
> > > > >> for when it will be released?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks.
> > > > >> Ian
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> users-unsubscribe@...
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> users-help@...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Ganhdi
> >
> > "Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not
> a crime. "
> > Earnest Hemingway
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
to specify generic attribute names explicitly in the taglib.xml and
ability to specify method binding signatures in the taglib.xml file),
but I haven't felt motivated enough yet to sit down and create a
patch.
1.1.11 is perfectly stable for my needs and I wouldn't be motivated to
upgrade at this point in time.
On 5/31/07, Brian Smith <unobriani@...> wrote:
> I think the prevailing school of thought is Facelets 1.1.11 is quite stable
> and there is a wait and see attitude when it comes to JSF 2.0 (it may
> incorporate some or much of facelets), which would make developing a new
> version of Facelets sort of a waste of time.
>
> Just my perception
>
> -Brian
>
>
> On 5/31/07, Jason Suplizio <suplizio@...> wrote:
> > Is this thread dead? There still are several questions left unanswered -
> which adds a good deal of FUD around Facelets.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/29/07, Cracauer, Dave < dcracauer@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm going to jump into this one and share my experience with the
> project. We have some special needs from a templating system (I won't get
> into them here.) We currently have an internally modified version of Tiles
> that we use with our Struts application. We want to move our development to
> Seam/Facelets, but we need to be able to support the same functionality.
> There are a few changes to Facelets that would make this much easier. For
> example, there are a couple classes (can't recall off of the top of my head)
> that are final that we could subclass to fit our needs. I've verified this
> by building my own version of Facelets and building a small prototype. It
> would also be nice if our custom resource resolver was always called ( it
> doesn't seem to be for source tags, or when referring to a template .)
> > >
> > > Even if we didn't have these needs, I would still have concerns about
> using Facelets for our new projects. When planning a project, I like to be
> sure that if we run across a bug in the libraries we are using, it will get
> fixed. We're willing to fix bugs, but I haven't seen a process for getting
> patches applied.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately (or fortunately), since Facelets is so much better than
> JSP when using JSF, we're faced with the potential of managing our own
> internal branch of Facelets if we need to make changes. We don't like this,
> but we'll probably end up doing it.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Robinson
> [mailto:andrew.rw.robinson@...]
> > > Sent: Tue 5/29/2007 11:17 AM
> > > To: users@...
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: Facelets 1.2
> > >
> > > Why do you need facelets 1.2? What in 1.1.x doesn't fit your
> requirements?
> > >
> > > Facelets has been really stable for us and I haven't been waiting for
> > > a new release at all. In fact, I was perfectly happy on 1.0.14 until
> > > another 3rd party control required us to upgrade to 1.1.x.
> > >
> > > The only concern should be bug fix turn around time I would think and
> > > not new features. In that case I haven't seen any bug fixes in quite a
> > > while, but then again I haven't hit any of the bugs.
> > >
> > > -Andrew
> > >
> > > On 5/29/07, mike.sauer@... < mike.sauer@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For those of us evaluating facelets for recommendation for use in our
> > > > organizations it is troubling that questions such as these regarding
> the
> > > > status/roadmap of facelets go unanswered. Can anyone please provide
> some
> > > > reassurance and updates?
> > > >
> > > > >On 5/22/07, Jason Suplizio <suplizio@...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >I need to know that as well (even a ballpark). We're putting a
> timeline
> > > > >together for facelets adoption and this is very important to us.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >On 5/22/07, Ian Springer <ian.springer@...> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hello Jacob,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What new features are planned for Facelets 1.2 and is there an
> estimate
> > > > >> for when it will be released?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks.
> > > > >> Ian
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> users-unsubscribe@...
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> users-help@...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Ganhdi
> >
> > "Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not
> a crime. "
> > Earnest Hemingway
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
« Return to Thread: Facelets 1.2
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
