I developed my javafx application using couchbase-lite 1.3 and it works as expected.
But now, i want to use the N1QL query to retrieve the data from this database.
This is not possible with 1.3 version.
on https://docs.couchbase.com/couchbase-lite/2.0/index.html i can see that it possible with version 2.5 but i do not see the binaries jar for javafx.
Do someone knows how to add 2.5 binaries to the javafx project?
thanks
Couchbase-lite 2.x supports the Java language only on Android. We are considering pure Java support for a future release.
Related
I have the project which is designed and developed on very legacy frameworks. The frameworks which we are currently using are:
jboss-seam-2.2.1.jar
jsf-api-1.2_04-p02.jar
jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar
jsf-impl-1.2_04-p02.jar
richfaces-impl-3.2.1.GA.jar
These are quite old frameworks, may be around 12 years old or more.
Now, we are planning to upgrade these version to the latest stable version of the frameworks.
The question is, can we directly move from jsf1.2 to jsf 2.3 ? I don't see any documentation or reference for this migration.
Along with JSF upgrade what all are the components we may need to upgrade? Any Direction ?
Thanks in advance!!!
I'm trying to upgrade from JSF 2.2 to 2.4 in Netbeans 11.0.
I downloaded the binaries and added it as a new library:
But when I look into the properties of my project, I still see the old JSF versions 1.2 and 2.2:
Is adding it as a Maven dependency the only way to upgrade? I wanted to upgrade it globally, for all (future) projects.
I'm using Java EE 8 with Payara Server 5.192.
JSF 2.4 does not exist as an official API at all. Do not use it. Currently latest official version is 2.3 and the next one will be 3.0 which will be released as part of Jakarta EE 9 (which is essentially exactly the same as 2.3, but then with the package renamed from javax.faces to jakarta.faces).
See also the blog article Do not use org.glassfish Mojarra 2.4.0! written by yours truly.
No, JSF 2.4 is not there yet. Technically speaking, Mojarra 2.4.0 represents the latest state of the master branch as it was during the transfer from Oracle to Eclipse. That transfer took place when JSF 2.3 specification was already released and JSF 2.4 specification has still to be started yet. JSF 2.4 is far from being a beta, let alone a reasonable snapshot. And yet there is a Mojarra 2.4.0 in Maven instead of e.g. a Mojarra 2.4.0-M1. As per the agreement between Oracle and Eclipse, it was necessary to release the latest work on Mojarra under Oracle's umbrella into Maven Central before the transfer to Eclipse was completed. And later Eclipse will do the same after the transfer is completed so that the integrity can be validated by the public. Using version "2.4.0" is indeed way too confusing for the public, because does actually not at all represent a real "2.4.0" version, but it is what it is.
As to your specific problem with Netbeans, you need to upgrade it to see "JSF 2.3" as an option in its built-in dropdown. Alternatively you can also just ignore it and write JSF 2.3 targeted code yourself instead of letting the IDE autogenerate it. That's basically what that "JSF 2.3" option is doing. Autogenerating the suitable JSF 2.3 faces-config.xml file and such. But you as a programmer of course can easily write code yourself based on official documentation.
For the code evolution purposes of a legade system, I'd like to know which Jboss version was the first to support JSF 2.x ?
I found at:
https://access.redhat.com/articles/112673#EAP_6
I think that can be useful for planning new releases.
I am developing a barcode scanning application for J2ME. For that, I have come to know that zxing 1.7 has to be used. What version of Java do I need for zxing 1.7?
1.7 was the last version that supported JavaME, yes. Because of that, it requires only Java 1.2. I think it required CLDC 1.1 and MIDP 2.0.
Our project currently uses the very old Java Studio Creator framework and now has new requirements and plans for future deployments which require the application to finally remove JSC and migrate to either 1.8.x or 2.0 of IceFaces.
A migration to 1.8.x seems to be the safest and most reliable option to take to me. Would delaying and not taking on the challenge of a migration JSF 2.0 make sense or should a migration directly to IceFaces 2.0 be used instead?
That <webuijsf:xxx> component library is called "Woodstock". Now you have new and solid keyword. ICEFaces was officially been pointed as recommended replacement of Woodstock projects when Woodstock was officially been abandoned and discontinued.
Woodstock to ICEFaces migration
Woodstock to ICEFaces porting guide
Woodstock to ICEFaces component migration matrix
ICEFaces 2 tutorials and examples
I personally recommend you to just take the ICEFaces migration path. It's well documented. Also, when you migrate to "plain" JSF 2.0, you'll have to redo the entire look'n'feel as "plain" JSF components does not ship with any bundled CSS. Going to ICEFaces 1.8 or 2.0 doesn't really matter that much. To take advantage of new JSF 2.0 features behind ICEFaces 2.0 you'll only have to change a lot of other things afterwards, but even without that, you should already have a working project.