Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Cody Lerum <co...@gmail.com>]

I'm going to try and outline the three features that I think
DeltaSpike is currently missing before we can steer existing Seam 3
users to the project. Once we have these features covered I think we
can start picking up some legacy Seam users thus growing the
DeltaSpike community. I think these may be the tipping point for some
larger adoption.

1. Security + JSF integration: Path level security ie
"/private/home.xhtml" and /public/home.xhtml". Includes mechanism to
redirect to a view denied page or a login page if not logged in.

2. JSF + Transaction integration: Provide a means to handle
transactions for the restore, invoke and render phases.

3. JSF Messages support: Support creating JSF messages and having them
displayed after page redirects / conversational boundaries.

These might not missing, but are lacking clear steps for a new user to
piece the various modules together to provide the required
functionality. Might just be a doc issue.

Do we still have a published roadmap as I'm having a hard time finding
it? If we do have a roadmap, where do these features fit on it and do
you think it makes sense to target these specific features.

Thanks!

-C

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>]

A very big +1 from me. I know we're all busy with things and this isn't our
first priority for most of us, but if all you can do is review
documentation or one section of code (say i18n or transaction from this
release) it will be much better than not doing anything. Also for any of
the previous Seam 3 contributors, the earlier you start looking at what
we're doing in DeltaSpike, the easier it will be for you to adapt your
module or create new ideas.

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> wrote:

> hi @ all,
>
> since our plan is to get deltaspike in a good shape by v0.9, it's imo
> pretty obvious that we have to start with the jsf module soon (as well as
> with some other modules) and nobody questioned it so far.
> however, in view of planned features for release x nothing is a "must". we
> are a community centric open-source project and nothing else.
>
> since we communicate that until v1 even apis can change, we will see some
> early adaptors and people who start to experiment with it (which is great
> and important).
> however, imo most users will join after the api is stable. at least that's
> also what i hear on a regular basis - users are very interested in
> deltaspike, but they will (or have to) wait until it's stable.
>
> for now it's way more important to move on faster as a (dev-)community
> (independent of the topic).
> it's really very important to get more reviewers during the dev process.
> besides code-reviews also the documentation, examples,... are very
> important.
> we just can do it fast(er), if more people join the effort actively. right
> now we have about 4 (of more than 20) committers who join the effort on a
> regular basis.
> getting new contributors (and therefore potential committers) is important,
> but as a >short term< goal i would be happy to see more activity from
> existing committers.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/7/3 Mehdi Heidarzadeh <he...@gmail.com>
>
> > +1 for starting with JSF in 0.4
> >
> > I  think for 0.4, JSF is a must because most developers can start to use
> > Deltaspike since jsf is included in Deltaspike.
> >
> > --
> > Mehdi Heidarzadeh Ardalani
> > Independent JEE Consultant, Architect and Developer.
> > http://www.TheBigJavaBlog.com
> >
>



-- 
Jason Porter
http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/lightguardjp

Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling

PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

hi @ all,

since our plan is to get deltaspike in a good shape by v0.9, it's imo
pretty obvious that we have to start with the jsf module soon (as well as
with some other modules) and nobody questioned it so far.
however, in view of planned features for release x nothing is a "must". we
are a community centric open-source project and nothing else.

since we communicate that until v1 even apis can change, we will see some
early adaptors and people who start to experiment with it (which is great
and important).
however, imo most users will join after the api is stable. at least that's
also what i hear on a regular basis - users are very interested in
deltaspike, but they will (or have to) wait until it's stable.

for now it's way more important to move on faster as a (dev-)community
(independent of the topic).
it's really very important to get more reviewers during the dev process.
besides code-reviews also the documentation, examples,... are very
important.
we just can do it fast(er), if more people join the effort actively. right
now we have about 4 (of more than 20) committers who join the effort on a
regular basis.
getting new contributors (and therefore potential committers) is important,
but as a >short term< goal i would be happy to see more activity from
existing committers.

regards,
gerhard



2012/7/3 Mehdi Heidarzadeh <he...@gmail.com>

> +1 for starting with JSF in 0.4
>
> I  think for 0.4, JSF is a must because most developers can start to use
> Deltaspike since jsf is included in Deltaspike.
>
> --
> Mehdi Heidarzadeh Ardalani
> Independent JEE Consultant, Architect and Developer.
> http://www.TheBigJavaBlog.com
>

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Mehdi Heidarzadeh <he...@gmail.com>]

+1 for starting with JSF in 0.4

I  think for 0.4, JSF is a must because most developers can start to use
Deltaspike since jsf is included in Deltaspike.

-- 
Mehdi Heidarzadeh Ardalani
Independent JEE Consultant, Architect and Developer.
http://www.TheBigJavaBlog.com

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

["Lincoln Baxter, III" <li...@gmail.com>]

+1, some solid functionality for jsf would be nice. I think we should
probably take the multi field validation as part of that.

---
Lincoln Baxter's Droid
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
On Jul 2, 2012 11:19 AM, "Christian Kaltepoth" <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
wrote:

> +1 for starting with JSF in 0.4
>
> IMHO it is very important to have JSF support in place soon because
> CDI + JSF is a very common application stack. And as soon as there is
> some basic integration, people will hopefully start using DS in real
> life projects and we will get more feedback.
>
> Christian
>
> 2012/7/2 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> > really good points. What about starting with JSF in 0.4?
> >
> > Which of course also means that we need to get 0.3 out of the door soon.
> > Which in turn means that we still need to do a bit of review ;)
> >
> > I'll start a discussion about 0.3 final cleanup.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Cody Lerum <co...@gmail.com>
> >> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Cc:
> >> Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 2:48 AM
> >> Subject: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption
> >>
> >> I'm going to try and outline the three features that I think
> >> DeltaSpike is currently missing before we can steer existing Seam 3
> >> users to the project. Once we have these features covered I think we
> >> can start picking up some legacy Seam users thus growing the
> >> DeltaSpike community. I think these may be the tipping point for some
> >> larger adoption.
> >>
> >> 1. Security + JSF integration: Path level security ie
> >> "/private/home.xhtml" and /public/home.xhtml". Includes mechanism
> >> to
> >> redirect to a view denied page or a login page if not logged in.
> >>
> >> 2. JSF + Transaction integration: Provide a means to handle
> >> transactions for the restore, invoke and render phases.
> >>
> >> 3. JSF Messages support: Support creating JSF messages and having them
> >> displayed after page redirects / conversational boundaries.
> >>
> >> These might not missing, but are lacking clear steps for a new user to
> >> piece the various modules together to provide the required
> >> functionality. Might just be a doc issue.
> >>
> >> Do we still have a published roadmap as I'm having a hard time finding
> >> it? If we do have a roadmap, where do these features fit on it and do
> >> you think it makes sense to target these specific features.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> -C
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Christian Kaltepoth
> Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>]

+1 for starting with JSF in 0.4

IMHO it is very important to have JSF support in place soon because
CDI + JSF is a very common application stack. And as soon as there is
some basic integration, people will hopefully start using DS in real
life projects and we will get more feedback.

Christian

2012/7/2 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> really good points. What about starting with JSF in 0.4?
>
> Which of course also means that we need to get 0.3 out of the door soon.
> Which in turn means that we still need to do a bit of review ;)
>
> I'll start a discussion about 0.3 final cleanup.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Cody Lerum <co...@gmail.com>
>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 2:48 AM
>> Subject: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption
>>
>> I'm going to try and outline the three features that I think
>> DeltaSpike is currently missing before we can steer existing Seam 3
>> users to the project. Once we have these features covered I think we
>> can start picking up some legacy Seam users thus growing the
>> DeltaSpike community. I think these may be the tipping point for some
>> larger adoption.
>>
>> 1. Security + JSF integration: Path level security ie
>> "/private/home.xhtml" and /public/home.xhtml". Includes mechanism
>> to
>> redirect to a view denied page or a login page if not logged in.
>>
>> 2. JSF + Transaction integration: Provide a means to handle
>> transactions for the restore, invoke and render phases.
>>
>> 3. JSF Messages support: Support creating JSF messages and having them
>> displayed after page redirects / conversational boundaries.
>>
>> These might not missing, but are lacking clear steps for a new user to
>> piece the various modules together to provide the required
>> functionality. Might just be a doc issue.
>>
>> Do we still have a published roadmap as I'm having a hard time finding
>> it? If we do have a roadmap, where do these features fit on it and do
>> you think it makes sense to target these specific features.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -C
>>



-- 
Christian Kaltepoth
Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal

Re: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption

[Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>]

really good points. What about starting with JSF in 0.4?

Which of course also means that we need to get 0.3 out of the door soon.
Which in turn means that we still need to do a bit of review ;)

I'll start a discussion about 0.3 final cleanup.

LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: Cody Lerum <co...@gmail.com>
> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 2:48 AM
> Subject: Missing features for Seam 3 users adoption
> 
> I'm going to try and outline the three features that I think
> DeltaSpike is currently missing before we can steer existing Seam 3
> users to the project. Once we have these features covered I think we
> can start picking up some legacy Seam users thus growing the
> DeltaSpike community. I think these may be the tipping point for some
> larger adoption.
> 
> 1. Security + JSF integration: Path level security ie
> "/private/home.xhtml" and /public/home.xhtml". Includes mechanism 
> to
> redirect to a view denied page or a login page if not logged in.
> 
> 2. JSF + Transaction integration: Provide a means to handle
> transactions for the restore, invoke and render phases.
> 
> 3. JSF Messages support: Support creating JSF messages and having them
> displayed after page redirects / conversational boundaries.
> 
> These might not missing, but are lacking clear steps for a new user to
> piece the various modules together to provide the required
> functionality. Might just be a doc issue.
> 
> Do we still have a published roadmap as I'm having a hard time finding
> it? If we do have a roadmap, where do these features fit on it and do
> you think it makes sense to target these specific features.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -C
>