- This topic has 87 replies, 61 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We’ve been comparing the various ‘web frameworks’ out there and the absolute hands down winner for us is the stack of Jboss+Ejb3, supporting web apps written using JBoss Seam and Facelets. All of us who have tried this stack are absolutely converts – easy, powerful and things just kind of work like you expect them to.
Our co. needs one webapp that can completely revise it’s look-n-feel and flow depending on which of our clients logs into the webapp – Facelets is the only thing that actually worked out-of-the box for the level of templating we need (while being easy to use)
Then, toss in the Seam/Ejb3 component mix and you’ve got a really easy to use stack.
EJB3 support should be comming very soon, same with Facelets. Seam support, not sure. We will see how much demand there is for it.
I would really love to see more of the JBoss framework support as well. My company is migrating our web framework to JBoss and this would be a VERY nice addition.
Hi Riyad,
While I can understand that you rely on demand in order to guide feature sets – I can also see that being pro-active instead of retro-active on this technology is going to be a win for MyEclipseIDE – Look at the pedigree of Seams authors, Then look at what the code actually does – there’s no way this is a bad idea. Best yet – it’s EASY to use – Seamless – So, build it, and they’ll come….
Thanks for listening,
Kurt OlsenSo, build it, and they’ll come….
I appreciate your enthusiasm and at one point I felt this way to but it’s definately not the case. If you are proactive as a tool vendor you can sink 100s of thousands of dollars in features that people will like but won’t drive sales so then you start cutting developers because you can’t afford their salary anymore.
The best is to combine the two, being proactive in areas where you have seen returns and being reactive with new technologies. This is exactly what we try and do.
@kurt_olsen wrote:
Hi Riyad,
While I can understand that you rely on demand in order to guide feature sets – I can also see that being pro-active instead of retro-active on this technology is going to be a win for MyEclipseIDE – Look at the pedigree of Seams authors, Then look at what the code actually does – there’s no way this is a bad idea. Best yet – it’s EASY to use – Seamless – So, build it, and they’ll come….
Thanks for listening,
Kurt OlsenKurt,
unfortunately it does not work that way. Having big names behind a product alone does not guarantee that it is a good product for everyone. For an example, look at Rational Rose. The opinions about it are quite diverse, there are those who like it, and those who hate it. And it has really big names behind it.
Best regards,
Robert
+1 for Seam support.
I think supporting seam would be a good sales driver for you. Seam seems to be rapidly gaining popularity and could be a good source of new subscribers. Then you would also have a heads up supporting the Web Beans JSR as that evolves.
Has any one succeeded in deploying the simplest seam 1.0.1 GA example (registration) to JBoss with MyEclipse deployment options only (no ant deploy file). It would be a good first step ! ( I have been at it for 2 days, but so far… no go: I feel it’s very doable, except I’m too dumb to find a way). I tried:
jbos-seam: dependant java project
web module: jboss-seam-registration (no extention)
ejb module: jboss-seam-registration.jar
Each module compiles an deploys fine separately (archived as in example). Problem is with archived ear: unwanted JSF and jboss-seam.jar in WEB-INF/lib of archived web module. Any suggestions ?Sorry for the previous post: I just managed it. application.xml has to be edited manually for seam java module, which is not a problem. The lib problem was simply due to improper MyEclipse EAR and WAR options sellections.
By the way: +1 for seam supportMy company is also working with Seam and EJB3. I would like to use MyEclipseIDE for this. NetBeans is the only answer now.
+1 for me. This combination looks like it has a lot of promise. The biggest problem I’ve had with Seam is getting a project off the ground. The official advice from Gavin King is currently “build off the example Ant scripts”. So if you can at least provide “Seam capabilities” and “Facelets capabilities” to add to a project (with libraries and deployment management), that would be a good start.
– Eric
