- This topic has 162 replies, 89 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Im looking to finally make the move to JSF, and want to do so using facelets, so a big +1 from me. And possibly more ++’s to come (The last couple contracts I’ve been responsible for bringing on MyEclipse and a number of licences.)
Support for facelets will bring tremendous values to MyEclipse. So far, there is no other IDEs have this and like previous threads mention, even with its arcane debugging methods we have now, facelets give huge productivity boosts.
Just imagine if MyEclipse makes its editing and usage even simpler!
JSF support is the reason why our company decided to use MyEclipse. Facelet is a very powerful tool for JSF, so support for Facelets will be very appreciated.
Facelet support in MyEclipse will make it much better.
Facelets are extremely cool and Facelets support would greatly imporve the development of new webapplications.
so +1 form meIf it wasn’t for facelets I probably would have given up on JSF. Working with JSF in JSP is an absolute nightmare and I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. Maybe these problems will be ironed out in the next version of Java Enterprise but Facelets is so great in so many departments (Forget about Tiles support, Facelets is a far better templating engine) that I can’t see it going away for a very long time. At the moment, Facelets is the only way to develop in JavaServer Faces without hitting several brick walls!!
+5 for facelets.
Making all this stuff by hand is annoying…
Creating a handler to Tomahawk on Facelets a immense plus, too…Just dreaming.
=)+15 from me and my colleagues for facelets integration
tomahawk and sandbox integration would be nice tooNo word yet, I keep letting management know that it’s a biggie, along with iBatis and Maven2. They have to figure out a) how much it will cost, b) if it’s worth it and c) timeline.
The best thing is to keep asking for it and I’ll keep letting them know it’s being requested. If it were up to us and not going out of business wasn’t an issue, we’d probably implement everything you guys asked for in the first post, but once you introduce the money factor you’d be surprised how many “sure things” are no longer “sure things”, so a lot of thought needs to go into every decision.
