Yes, the PortletBridge should work on any JSR 168 container running on
either WSRP 1.0 or any variant of pre WSRP 2.0. Likewise Trinidad
should coexist with the PortletBridge in all environments with the
following exceptions: if you don't have one of the latest versions
(Scott should be able to list the patch number from a week or so ago),
Trinidad needs the PortletBridge to disable the code in its
ViewHandler.createView which replaces the UIViewRoot with its own.
Secondly, Trinidad PPR isn't supported. This later is primarily a
limitation of JSR 168/WSRP 1.0 which doesn't allow in portlet context
execution of resources. As this function is in JSR 286/WSRP 2.0 I
expect a lot of pressure to provide a complementary version for JSR 286
as soon as possible.
FYI ... supporting a bridge/JSF in a WSRP environment was one important
factor in why JSR 301 was started. WSRP 1.0 forces JSR 168 to run in
"strict mode" while many local implementation run in a more relaxed
fashion. The benefit of running in strict mode is that you should be
able to run correctly on all portlet containers. That being said it
does make the solution harder to produce.
-Mike-
Scott O'Bryan wrote:
I'm expecting that as of JSR-286 though, we should even be able to
support popups in a wsrp environemnt. :)
Anyway, think of it this way. WSRP is a web-services layer. JSR-168
is the container. Typically Portlets are run under WSRP though the
JSR-168 container. The only difference is that these portlets exist
in a "remote" environment and go though a webservice layer before they
are sent to the browser. The intention of JSR-301 is to support
JSR-168 both locally and remotely (via WSRP).
All the work I've done with Trinidad, so far, has been on a remote
(WSRP) enabled portal and I know that Martin has done some extra work
on local portals. So Martin's assessment is totally correct. In
theory the two environments are not much different other then the
"local" paradigm allows you to exploit some "tricks" to get around
limitations in the spec. WSRP does not play nicely with most of these
"tricks" but should offer the same capabilities from a container
standpoint.
Make sense
Scott
Martin Marinschek wrote:
Hi Matthias,
the portlet bridge has nothing in it which wouldn't work with WSRP.
Trinidad, with PPR and popus disabled, will also work in a WSRP
environment.
I have written some extensions (not open sourced yet) so that you can
also use PPR and popups in a portlet environment, these extensions
won't work with WSRP.
regards,
Martin
On 11/22/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
does Trinidad or the portlet brigde support WSRP ?
Or does it "only" support 168 ?
Or is 301 also about WSRP ?
Thx,
Matthias
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
