Unfortunately, ICEFaces have a closed architecture. Even Ajax4jsf that is designed to be interoperable with third party component library, it cannot help ICEFaces components to become interoperable. If ICEFaces drop down direct-to-dom approach and return back to open world in the future, the combination might be possible.
Definetly use Ajax4JSF and you are free to combine it with whatever you want.
I first chose ICEfaces, and switched to Ajax4JSF and are pretty happy with it!
Thanks a lot!!!
Just another Q. Does Ajax4JSF has all the components like (Tree Menu, Sorting, Pagination, Calendar etc. ) that ICEFaces has?
Direct-to-DOM rendering is what allows the developer to focus on their application, rather than low-level Ajax details (such as which component subtree should be rendered in response to which event); of course, we are always interested in improving interoperability with ajax4jsf.
ICEfaces is certainly not a closed architecture: it is open source under the MPL and supports a wide variety of third-party components, IDEs, and application servers.
Ted, first of all, you are welcome. Glad to hear you in person here.
However, "closed architecture" and "open source" are not the same things. If you are fighting against the whole world, open sourcing your weapons does not makes too much sense from the technical perspective. (I am not going to argue about the marketing point of view, of course). BWT, the same will happen with Adobe going to open source Flex under MPL. Closed technology remains closed even the code is open sourced.
Closed technology is when you advise that developer "must use **only** standard JSF tags (f:) and ICEfaces tags (ice:)", when you have to decide do you need "to support a trillion component libraries" instead of just leave them working as they are, without any modification.
Requirement to replace the original renderers with "Direct-to-DOM" ones is a showstopper for you. It is five-year-old idea. Just drop it and look forward to the future. Using modern browser as a mirror for the server-side object is not only one way how to simplify the development. Together we can find more reliable way how to accomplish it
You will be less glad to hear from me in person than Ted, as he is far more polite than I. You would do well to abridge the gibbberish that you write to the topics and technologies that you understand. You are doing pmohanan and other forum members a disservice by misrepresenting the ICEfaces technology, and by suggesting that trillions of other JSF component libraries will happily coexist under A4J, because your words and innuendos in both cases are filled with untruths.
For those of you out there that are evaluating JSF/Ajax frameworks, I suggest there are other consideration besides component libraries that are important. With ICEfaces, our primary goal is to incorporate Ajax features into JSF in a completely transparent fashion. This means that the Java enterprise developer can develop pure JSF applications and get all the benefits of Ajax without additional development consideration. With A4J you will need to wire all the Ajax interactions together manually, which is an extremely limiting deficiency in the A4J framework. It basically dismantles the separation of roles between developers and designers, and can be extremely debilitating to both. Furthermore, we know Enterprise developers want to work with the tools and development processes that they are used to. We don't cram yet another tool down your throat in order to use ICEfaces. We integrate across all popular IDEs, and fit seamlessly into your existing Java development best practices.
Now Sergey, regarding your suggestion that we just drop it, this must be a thought straight out of your dreams. D2D rendering is a 5 year old innovation that we continue to build on, and has resulted in the most transparent means in the industry for Java Enterprise developers to deliver rich interfaces in a pure Java programming model. Since open sourcing, ICEfaces hosts the fastest growing community in the JSF/Ajax realm, and has been established as one of the dominant solutions in the industry. As for cooperation, we are actively engaged with the JSF community to improve the state of the art going forward. I don't get any cooperative vibes coming from your posting. You seem pretty antagonistic to me - again a characteristic that will not benefit the community at large.
Finally, I ask that you refrain from misleading the community with inaccurate information about any topic that you are not well-qualified to discuss. Let those of us that understand the ICEfaces technology represent it accurately to the community. None of them are interested in your rhetoric.
CTO, ICEsoft Technologies
Steve, thank you for such great response here in forum!
Believe me, our goals it the same as ICESoft goals - to provide developers with best technology possible for WEB/Ajax development. So, I'm sure we will help our community if we will make our products works better together and we will help them even more if we will work together on future JSF 2 to make it even better using existing achievements of both of us.
So, I ask you to start working together to make both our products better behave with each other. Please contact me directly to email@example.com, so we can initiate some collaboration activity rather sooner than later.
Thank you again,
CTO, Exadel Inc.
Hi...Steve & Igor,
Thanks a lot for your responses. !! It only makes me believe more stronger to move to open source products (and the company I work completely supports this) .
Coming back to the basics, I have only put in the post what I had heard from different people using the products and their reasoning behind choosing a products. ( Which might be completely wrong!! ) But only their experiences help us as a starting point.
I will be following this thread more closely & secondly I will also try to give a call to respective companies to get more information.
Couple of points I will definitely ask would be:
- Component interoperability
- Browser dependency
- Portal Dependency
Is there any thing else missing in the list ??
Again, thanks a lot!!
So, if Ajax4jsf continues going with direct-to-dom and ICEFaces keeps its responseWriter, we'll never be able to use both of them together?
I heard that ICEFaces is very buggy, but I received an email about the version 1.6.0 DR #4 with 180+ bugs fixed. So I think it's less buggy now. I wonder if I should spend time on Seam or GWT or ICEFaces: a difficult selection :(