Skip to main content

What should be in the Java EE 6 Web Profile?

A small set of JSRs
17% (121 votes)
A larger set of JSRs, but without JSF 2.0 or Web Beans 1.0
12% (85 votes)
A larger set of JSRs, including JSF 2.0 and Web Beans 1.0
47% (332 votes)
I'm not interested in Java EE 6 profiles
24% (172 votes)
Total votes: 710

Comments

Both base profiles

A "Servlet Container" profile (potentially without JSP) and a "Web Application" profile (containing JSP, JSF, and WebBeans) both might be appropriate.

Who needs profiles?

Not meaning to flame, but my team will probably not use them. To me, the whole profiles bit seems to be aimed more at container vendors, and what they have to support by default. When we want make web applications, we simply download Spring + a JPA provider and then add in jars as necessary. Sure, if a profile means we have those jars already, great, but it's very easy to download jars and stick them in your classpath. I'd much rather just go get them and have control over the process, than having a bunch of stuff I'll never use (JSF) forced on to me, although as long as they don't conflict with my project's libraries then I could care less.

Wish there was one more selection...

When people say they're not interested in Java EE profiles, do they mean they don't care about Java EE, or that they don't care about the profiles part?

What about JSR-286 (Portlet 2.0) in the full profile?

The full profile should include JSR-286 (Portlet 2.0), which has recently been submitted to the JCP for approval.

What about JSR-286 (Portlet 2.0) in the full profile?

I highly agree -- portlets need to be part of the full profile.

What about JSR-286 (Portlet 2.0) in the full profile?

Yep that would be nice, although this might also be incorporated in JSF 2.0