JSF disputes part 2
I beg of you all, don’t use JSF, boycott it, avoid it all you can. Do not let it thrive or prosper. We don’t want it improved or tweaked, we want it to die the horrible painful death it so richly deserves. I can see the argument that the platform needs something like it. Taking struts and turning it into a specification is not the answer. The JSF group is in many ways much less constrained that the EJB group by backward compatibility. The few people who have chosen to adopt JSF can be (rightfully) dismissed as lunatics who expect to jump through hoops for every iteration anyway. Mission-critical JSF is practically an oxymoron, and there are many many great ideas in the community that should be leveraged and incorporated. Tainting the J2EE 5.0 spec with something so untested and universally reviled by the hardcore enterprise people, bread and butter webapp folk, and the hobbyist web monkey kids will do the the entire platform a great disservice.
So I beg of you all, don’t use JSF, boycott it, avoid it all you can. Do not let it thrive or prosper. We don’t want it improved or tweaked, we want it to die the horrible painful death it so richly deserves.
I can see the argument that the platform needs something like it. Taking struts and turning it into a specification is not the answer. The JSF group is in many ways much less constrained that the EJB group by backward compatibility. The few people who have chosen to adopt JSF can be (rightfully) dismissed as lunatics who expect to jump through hoops for every iteration anyway. Mission-critical JSF is practically an oxymoron, and there are many many great ideas in the community that should be leveraged and incorporated. Tainting the J2EE 5.0 spec with something so untested and universally reviled by the hardcore enterprise people, bread and butter webapp folk, and the hobbyist web monkey kids will do the the entire platform a great disservice.
