I should've shut my mouth earlier :). Kaleb
-----Original Message----- From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 12:18 PM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: Re: JSF -> Shale transition I prefer to do all my webapps in Assembly running on dedicated hardware with no OS at all. Beat *THAT* performance! ;) Frank Gary VanMatre wrote: >>What do you mean by "inferior if you are interested in performance". >>Is the overhead of the dialog/navigation processing pretty high? >> > > > In perspective, vanilla servlet programming is faster than Struts. > > Isn't it relative to what you *value* in a web framework. > > Gary > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Dakota Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 4:19 PM >>To: Struts Users Mailing List >>Subject: Re: JSF -> Shale transition >> >>Well, have you considered classic struts? Shale is really meant for >>people who are trying to change an application from JSF to Struts, and >>not everyone, including myself, think this is a good idea. Shale is >>not Struts improved but a transition to something entirely different, >>and inferior in my opinion, if you are interested in performance. >> >>On 9/8/05, Walton, Kaleb (ISS Southfield) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>We're wanting to go from our home-brewed method of interaction using >>>jsps and servlets that are not very consistent in their expression >>>(other than the general jsp/servlet specs) to something that defines >>>interactions more concretely. Our current frustrations include form >>>handling, page transitions, forwarding, etc. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Kaleb >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Dakota Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:44 AM >>>To: Struts Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Subject: Re: JSF -> Shale transition >>> >>>Moving from Struts to JSF is moving to a "more defined" framework? >>>That is pretty difficult to grasp. Could you explain? >>> >>> >>> >>>On 9/6/05, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>>On 9/6/05, Walton, Kaleb (ISS Southfield) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hey all, >>>>> >>>>>As I had mentioned in a previous post, our team is looking to move >> >>>>>towards a more well defined web framework. From my limited >>>>>experience using Shale (ran the shale-use-cases) I'm not feeling >>>>>very confident that we could use it *right away*. >>>>> >>>>>I wanted to ask for opinions on what would be a gradual step for us >>>>>to take towards the Shale framework (once it's stable enough to >> >>>>>use in a production environment). For example, would JSF + Spring >>>>>be a good combo that would make for an easy transition to Shale? >>>>>Struts + >>> >>>>>WebFlow + Spring? Etc.. >>>>> >>>>>Do the aforementioned framework combinations even matter? Will >>>>>Shale >>> >>>>>just add another layer on top or glue together with what we would >>>>>have already developed? Although I've been reading up on Shale >>>>>quite >>> >>>>>a bit, my understanding is still limited so please excuse me if >>>>>these questions are easily found through already documented >> >>sources. >> >>>>>If they are, please share where they can be found :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>The key to choosing a transition approach is what you want to use >>>>for the "front controller" part of your architecture durng the >>>>interim. If >>> >>>>you're starting from Struts, a straightforward path would be to use >>>>the integration library to start switching your pages to using JSF >>>>components instead of Struts HTML tags (without having to modify >>>>your actions), followed by a migration of the back-end logic to >>>>using JSF's >>> >>>>front controller and request processing lifecycle. >>>> >>>>If, on the other hand, you decide to commit to JSF's controller >>>>early rather than late, you might as well just use Shale along with >>>>it from the beginning. Unlike the way that other frameworks deal >>>>with JSF, Shale >>>>*assumes* you will be using the JSF controller architecture, and it >>>>just adds ease of use around problems you'll face anyway. It doesn't >> >>>>try to treat JSF as purely a component architecture. >>>> >>>>Craig McClanahan >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>> >>>>>Kaleb > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]