-
1. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
julien1 Feb 27, 2004 5:46 AM (in response to mkural)we are thinking about doing
-
2. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
mkural Feb 27, 2004 8:55 AM (in response to mkural)"cooper" wrote:
we are thinking about doing
Did you think about integrating with an already existing portlet container (not portal server, just the portlet container portion)? So you don't have to write a portlet container from scratch. Some open-source portlet containers out there:
Pluto portlet container
eXo portlet container inside eXo portal (www.exoplatform.org)
Do you think this is feasible rather than writing a portlet container from scratch? -
3. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
julien1 Feb 27, 2004 9:16 AM (in response to mkural)I don't know yet, this is not bullet #1 on the list. I think implementing portlet is not that hard and I did not looked at Mickey's dog.
-
4. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
ivelin.ivanov Feb 27, 2004 9:22 AM (in response to mkural)
I've posted a request on both the eXo and liferay maliling lists to think about joining Nukes. Let's see who will go first.
Ivelin -
5. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
mkural Feb 27, 2004 11:55 AM (in response to mkural)By the way just to let you now that Brian from Liferay had emailed JBoss about this matter a year and half ago but JBoss did not respond. Maybe now is a good time to respond to him regarding joining efforts with Liferay. Perhaps Julien could get on that.
-
6. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
ivelin.ivanov Feb 27, 2004 1:58 PM (in response to mkural)Sounds like the right thing to do.
Julien? -
7. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
julien1 Feb 27, 2004 5:29 PM (in response to mkural)18 months ago I was not there, so I don't know. I will get in touch to see if we can share interests here.
-
8. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
giorgio42 Mar 1, 2004 2:55 AM (in response to mkural)That would be really cool! We are looking at both Nukes and Liferay, one for managing content, the other for providind a personalized view on the content.
At the moment we would go for Liferay because of the JSR-168 support.
All in all I think creating a PostNuke clone is aiming high enough for release 1.0. But after that real CMS/Portlet containers should be targeted (like Zope, Turbine 2.0, Cocoon etc.).
Thanks for the product and keep it going!
Georg -
9. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
hxp Mar 2, 2004 12:49 AM (in response to mkural)FWIW -- I think JSR-168 support in Nukes will be cool someday, and is probably inevitable, but I hope Julien pays _zero_ attention to it till at least several weeks after he's gotten 1.0 out the door and gotten some much needed rest.
Sorry to be blunt, but i detected a bit of tag-team pressure in this thread that IMO is insensitive to the phase the Nukes project is in -- coming down to the final _days_ of a 1.0 release.
Every open src project has its own culture/netiquette, and perhaps some more tuning-in to the JBoss forums and pages and code would be wise. (BTW, i'm not in any way an "official" with JBoss Group or JBoss project, but just a user and supporter who thinks these guys are doing a damn good job.... and I want to help keep 'em on track to a good 1.0 release.) -
10. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
julien1 Mar 2, 2004 1:22 AM (in response to mkural)we have jsr168 in the pipeline, kevin will implement ths jsr for us and will start that work very soon.
-
11. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
mkural Mar 2, 2004 5:21 PM (in response to mkural)we have jsr168 in the pipeline, kevin will implement ths jsr for us and will start that work very soon.
That's great to hear :-)
I have a simple suggestion. I think you should really consider using an already developed opensource portlet container such as Apache Pluto or eXo portlet container instead of writing your own JSR-168 portlet container from scratch. It will save you a lot of work and make it much easier to get the JSR-168 TCK compliance certification from Sun. For your information, TCK compliance certification for JSR-168 is free for qualifying open source projects.
References:
http://jakarta.apache.org/pluto
http://www.exoplatform.org -
12. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
ivelin.ivanov Mar 2, 2004 9:30 PM (in response to mkural)As we posted on another thread, the liferay folks tried to join Nukes about a year ago, but were ignored at the time. A good candidate to talk to for JSR168 support.
Ivelin -
13. Re: JSR-168 compliance?
mkural Mar 3, 2004 11:13 AM (in response to mkural)Has anybody contacted Liferay yet? You can contact Brian from Liferay.
-