[jpugalia]

Here are the details of third party components being used:

Java: 1.5.0_11
Tomcat: 5.5.17
JSF: Sun RI 1.1_01
Tomahawk: 1.1.3
Dojo: 0.4.0
Custom components: Yes - Built internally.

[pb16385]

Maybe something is wrong dealing with custom JSF component: iof i don't use them the application works good, if i use them the duplicate ID is raised right on these components....Any idea ??

[sergeysmirnov]

"pb16385" wrote:

Is the compatibility with JSF 1.1.01 still present ?

It was a huge jump between JSF 1.1.01 and JSF 1.1.02. JSF 1.1.01 is not thread-safety at all.
I played with 1.1.01 today and met a lot of random glitches. Everything became fine after I replace 1.1.01 with 1.1.02

So, it is better to say about incompatibility with 1.1.01 than beat this dead horse.

About duplicateID:
Early versions of jsf did not presume that only the part of the tree might be re-created. So, the uniqueness of id was limited by one rendering. The counter is reset and start from the beginning. It is a killer for partial update because generator of "unique" ids starts to generate duplicates.

[pb16385]

I understand but i was wondering why jsf 1.1.01 was working good with a4j 1.0.6 and not with the new versions...The partial html update was working too. This forces me to upgrade my framework and applications to 1.1.02, but it's not simple at all..(shame). I thought that a4j was independend of the jsf implementation.

[sergeysmirnov]

On practice, "independend of the jsf implementation" means supporting all possible variations. We have no power to fix the problems in the 1.1.01 itself. I think nobody is able to do so (without having a time machine). Therefore, having huge amount of workaround that specific for 1.1.01 is only one choice.
So, almost each new feature requires a special code for 1.1.01. Some of the feature might be disabled because there is no workaround for 1.1.01
1.0.7 (1.1.0) was the point when we started to look forward rather than backward. The workarounds for some features were not implemented, but went to TODO list.

Now, we have a dilemma - what to do first - new, required features (such as full portal support) or compatibility with oldest version

[pb16385]

Ok, thanks for your clear answers.
I will continue to use a4j 1.0.6 and will plan to migrate to new version of JSF.
Best whishes !
Simone

[pb16385]

Please let us know if you decide to continue to offer compatibility with Jsf 1.1.01. But i think is a matter of number of requests too. Thanks

[zenshai]

I am having this problem as well, upgraded to JSF 1.1_02, didnt help. (a4j ver 1.1.0)