JSF is not new to the mobile landscape.  As early as 2007, the ICEfaces framework was being used to deliver JSF-based applications to mobile devices.   Advanced browser capabilities on devices like the iPhone, coupled with advanced Ajax-based frameworks like ICEfaces, enabled JSF developers to adapt desktop-targeted Rich Internet Application (RIA's) to mobile devices in an effective manner.  So what has changed in the last five years that out-dates these early techniques, and what modern approaches can be applied to deliver a true native user experience to today's wide spectrum of smart phones and other mobile devices?  A brief review of the recent and astounding  history of smartphones will shed some light on this question and its answer.

Read the article here:

http://www.jsfcentral.com/articles/icemobile.html

IceFaces 3 Ace Components are copied/pasted/forked from PrimeFaces.

http://blog.primefaces.org/?p=1750

Hi Catagay,

I admire/respect you, your team and your team's works, but could you please stop saying "IceFaces 3 Ace Components are copied/pasted/forked from PrimeFaces" stuff? Instead you can say: there is PrimeFaces Mobile for developers to choose/consider/compare with ICEmobile.

PS: I want to put a direct link to PrimeFaces Mobile but cannot find any. I have to go to primefaces.org and then click on the Mobile tab.

I don't enjoy doing it myself a lot but we must do it to let everyone know that IceFaces is a copy of PrimeFaces. I'm aware this is not nice for people like you who are already aware of what IceFaces has done, so please ignore that. Target audience of my message is people who are not aware the fact that IceFaces Ace components are 75% copied/pasted/forked by IceSoft and advertised with some lies that PrimeFaces Team has been notified of that. Again sorry about that, but I feel like I had to do this time to time to spread the truth ;)

Cagatay,

 If you are going to pronounce things as being "truthful" you should at least get your facts straight.  We did import approximately 30 of the PF components into the ICEfaces 3.0 ACE compoenent library, alongside a number of other YUI, jQuery and other custom components.  And we made them better. We added over 200 feature enhancements, bug fixes and code improvements needed to get them to run across platforms such as WebSphere, WebLogic etc.  And then we re-released them along with their improvements back to the open source community.  

We are pretty transparent about how and why things were done, with relevant details as to what exactly we did and why we did them outlined here:

http://www.icesoft.org/projects/ICEfaces/ace-primefaces-faq.jsf

We even invited you on a number of occaisions to participate in the activity and offered to contribute the code changes back to PrimeFaces, which you declined.  If you didn't want your Apache based open source code to be used in the manner permitted by the license, you shouldn't have released it under open source in the first place.  Oh right!  You had to because the PF library itself relies on other third party open source code from other third party developers, jQuery etc.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Brian,

Your faq page says;

PrimeFaces was advised of our decision to fork the library and the rational behind it in June of 2011.

This is a LIE and misleading information to the public as you've never done that. You've offered sponsorship over PrimeFaces and we've declined because we don't want a competitor to touch PrimeFaces. Since we declined and as license permitted you've decided to copy/fork PrimeFaces codebase.

If you are going to pronounce things as being "truthful" you should at least get your facts straight.  We did import approximately 30 of the PF components into the ICEfaces 3.0 ACE compoenent library, alongside a number of other YUI, jQuery and other custom components.

30+ components you say, as I've stated that is %75+ of PrimeFaces Ace. I spent hours on IceFaces Ace component source code before we reveal it to the public. Check out Panel component comparison at;

http://blog.primefaces.org/?p=1692

That doesn't look improved to me, only package names are renamed to ice. Afaik changing package names are not improving the code. Maybe before commenting you need to talk to the developers in your team who handled the copying or so called improving.

We are pretty transparent about how and why things were done, with relevant details as to what exactly we did and why we did them outlined here:

http://www.icesoft.org/projects/ICEfaces/ace-primefaces-faq.jsf

Are you kidding? Everyone knows you put that faq page up to get out of the mess you are in after we announced that you copied our code and advertised it like it was yours.

If you didn't want your Apache based open source code to be used in the manner permitted by the license, you shouldn't have released it under open source in the first place.  Oh right!  You had to because the PF library itself relies on other third party open source code from other third party developers, jQuery etc.

We believe in open source and Apache license suits PrimeFaces the best, we just couldn't estimate that a competitor will copy/paste our code and advertise it like their own product. You copied PrimeFaces 2, PrimeFaces 3 have lots own native widgets we've written ourselves. 

It is unfortunate that instead of providing an alternative solution to the JSF ecosystem, you've decided to copy the code of your competitor. Your action is pathetic! Anyway will you be updating IceFaces codebase to PrimeFaces 3?

Yes, everybody including people in caverns with no cellphones know that IceFaces is based on (copied) the source code of PrimeFaces, as you know this is the only valid claim against IceFaces. Period.

When you are releasing code with Apache license, you're saying to the world: you can copy me and you can fork me. Furthermore you are saying "use my source code in your privative closed source products if you want".

If you still don't feel conformtable, try with something like dual licensing AGPL/proprietary and end of squizofrenic thinking like "everybody can copy but you don't".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensing

Drawback: be ready to criticism like in "Ext-JS-gate" licensing case.