servlet 2.4 requirement

[Ryan Wynn <bi...@gmail.com>]

Just wondering what people think about not including

 <listener>
   <listener-class>org.apache.shale.view.faces.LifecycleListener</listener-class>
 </listener>

in the taglib.tld of myfaces-core.  I believe correct me if I am wrong
that this is the only shale class that uses servlet 2.4.

If shale users wish to use these capabilites then they can add the
listener to their web.xml.  If they are running in a servlet 2.3
environment (like I am with WebSphere Portal 5.1) then it is possible
for the application to load and the get most of the benefits of shale.

Of course the other option is to put the listener and the tld into
another jar (just like the tiger jar) which I guess may or may not be
more inconvenient than the you include it yourself approach.

I realize that Shale does not want to cater to old specs, but in this case
I'm not sure the convenience is valueable enough to sacrifice compatibility.

Re: servlet 2.4 requirement

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 9/10/06, Ryan Wynn <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just wondering what people think about not including
>
> <listener>
>    <listener-class>org.apache.shale.view.faces.LifecycleListener
> </listener-class>
> </listener>
>
> in the taglib.tld of myfaces-core.  I believe correct me if I am wrong
> that this is the only shale class that uses servlet 2.4.


There is also one in the Tiger Extensions module (which provides
annotation-based versions of the same services0, but you have to think about
this in the light of what you'd give up -- essentially 100% of the view
controller event callbacks, which is all driven by events fired by this
listener.  And the new exception handling management (exceptions thrown by
these event handler callbacks are routed through the exception handler by
the methods in this class).  Without all of that, there's not much point in
including shale-core at all.

If shale users wish to use these capabilites then they can add the
> listener to their web.xml.  If they are running in a servlet 2.3
> environment (like I am with WebSphere Portal 5.1) then it is possible
> for the application to load and the get most of the benefits of shale.
>
> Of course the other option is to put the listener and the tld into
> another jar (just like the tiger jar) which I guess may or may not be
> more inconvenient than the you include it yourself approach.
>
> I realize that Shale does not want to cater to old specs, but in this case
> I'm not sure the convenience is valueable enough to sacrifice
> compatibility.
>


I'm not opposed to someone wanting to step up and provide a version of the
view controller functionality (to the extent that this is possible) in a
manner that is compatible with Servlet 2.3.  But I'm very allergic to the
idea of requiring *any* configuration in web.xml for the use case that Shale
targets as normall (J2EE 1.4 and above).

Craig