Primefaces supporting JSF 2.0

[edykory]

Hi there.

We are working on a project involing Websphere Portal 8.0. This comes packaged with MyFaces 2.0.2, heavily patched by ibm (for depenency injection, bug fixes, ibm's portlet bridge implementation, etc). So it's not really your usual, buggy MyFaces 2.0.2.

In this context, i wanted to ask if PrimeFaces 4.x is targeting JSF 2.0 too, that is, avoiding using JSF 2.1 or JSF 2.2 API.

PS: No, upgrading JSF on WP 8.0 is not something i found possible. Give it a try if you don't believe me. It's doable only on WAS alone (documented here http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/wasin ... ation.html), not if you also need integration with the Portlet Bridge.

[cagatay.civici]

I don't remember using any JSF 2.1 specific API so in theory it should work but myfaces 2.0.2 is way too buggy even with patches from IBM. I'm aware of various issues from a PRO user whom they also have support from IBM.

Also why not change class loader to use your own implementation whether it is a recent release of myfaces or mojarra?

2.2 might not work due to servlet api dependencies but 2.1.x should work with proper class loading setting.

Good luck!

[smithh032772]

PS: No, upgrading JSF on WP 8.0 is not something i found possible.

You already answered your question. If it ain't broke, then don't fix it.

Why ask about PrimeFaces 4.x, if you have a solid/stable PrimeFaces 3.4.x, 3.5, and (PrimeFaces Elite) 3.5.x.. that works with your app? Is there, really, a need for your project to use PrimeFaces 4.x? Are you all targeting PrimeFaces 4.x 'features' or can you 'keep it simple' and continue to use pre-4.x releases of PrimeFaces?

The way I see it...if a project 'requires' an old/patched/buggy web server that requires an outdated JSF implementation, then you might as well continue using an outdated 'stable' version of PrimeFaces.

my two cents...

EDIT: wow, clicked Submit button, and Optimus Prime responded before me.

[edykory]

I don't remember using any JSF 2.1 specific API so in theory it should work but myfaces 2.0.2 is way too buggy even with patches from IBM. I'm aware of various issues from a PRO user whom they also have support from IBM.

Also why not change class loader to use your own implementation whether it is a recent release of myfaces or mojarra?

2.2 might not work due to servlet api dependencies but 2.1.x should work with proper class loading setting.

Good luck!

Thanks for the fast answer. Actually, changing the JSF implementation is more tricky than it sounds. As i said in the first post, the implementation packaged by ibm is heavily patched with ibm's own com.ibm packages in order to support CDI and portlet bridge. On the other hand, those "patches" cannot be copied to a newer release of myfaces since they are depenedent on some old api that myfaces themselved changed in myfaces 2.0.7. Using some "isolated" class loader to use my own implementation is possible but then i would have to provide my own cdi and gluing code, my own portlet bridge and gluing code, etc. Not feasable. Not with Websphere Portal

So it seams we will be using PrimeFaces 3.5.x and i will report on issues related to using JSF 2.1 api (we hit once the wall with some BehaviourXxxx classes, but i don't recall if it was with PrimeFaces 4.x code, or an older attempt to use Icefaces 3.3).

Cheers.

[smithh032772]

use Icefaces 3.3

IMO, never a good decision and not a nice thing to say around...in these parts. grrrr....

[cagatay.civici]

Well, IceFaces is a fork of PrimeFaces 2 so you'll still be using PrimeFaces in a way

[smithh032772]

And...

Well, (if I may)...

IceFaces will never be latest-n-greatest PrimeFaces.

[sudheer]

I'am using IBM WAS 7.0 as application sever for JSF web application.But I'am not going to use built-in embedded SUN's RI 1.2 or myfaces 2.x implementation.Because there won't be regular fixes/updates on JSF implementations.So better to go for own/outside JSF implementations.BTW,IBM myfaces 2.0.2 is not a recent release right? Since you are using bundled CDI and IBM portlets then you may choose built in implementations.In my opinion configuring external CDI and Portlet support won't be bad with respect to updated jsf implentations.

[edykory]

And...

Well, (if I may)...

IceFaces will never be latest-n-greatest PrimeFaces.

And your added value to this thread is that ....

[andyba]

And...

Well, (if I may)...

IceFaces will never be latest-n-greatest PrimeFaces.

And your added value to this thread is that ....

Worth more than your contribution as it is the truth.