Matt RaibleMatt Raible is a Web Developer and Java Champion. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

The Angular Mini-Book The Angular Mini-Book is a guide to getting started with Angular. You'll learn how to develop a bare-bones application, test it, and deploy it. Then you'll move on to adding Bootstrap, Angular Material, continuous integration, and authentication.

Spring Boot is a popular framework for building REST APIs. You'll learn how to integrate Angular with Spring Boot and use security best practices like HTTPS and a content security policy.

For book updates, follow @angular_book on Twitter.

The JHipster Mini-Book The JHipster Mini-Book is a guide to getting started with hip technologies today: Angular, Bootstrap, and Spring Boot. All of these frameworks are wrapped up in an easy-to-use project called JHipster.

This book shows you how to build an app with JHipster, and guides you through the plethora of tools, techniques and options you can use. Furthermore, it explains the UI and API building blocks so you understand the underpinnings of your great application.

For book updates, follow @jhipster-book on Twitter.


Over 10 years ago, I wrote my first blog post. Since then, I've authored books, had kids, traveled the world, found Trish and blogged about it all.

Xebia Web Framework Contest

I found an interesting blog post today about a contest (English translation) a French company (Xebia) had with some Java web frameworks.

4 teams have developed the same web application, each with a framework (very) different. The frameworks used were:

  • Struts 2
  • Google Web ToolKit
  • Wicket
  • My Faces (JSF)

Overall, I think it's a good summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the various frameworks.

Posted in Java at Oct 30 2007, 09:32:34 AM MDT 8 Comments

The reviewers of JSF obviously weren't aware of Facelets :-)

Posted by Jacob Hookom on October 30, 2007 at 10:36 AM MDT #

I just realized I can read some french (spanish is my 1st language) :)

Posted by musachy on October 30, 2007 at 12:06 PM MDT #

I think this is an idea that should be explored more. The various framework authors should all agree on a set of standard applications that they'll implement in their own framework. There should be a basic CRUD app, a CMS-type app, etc. We could have two versions for each application - one with just the core web framework features, one with any extra features the authors deem important. If the back end stays the same (that itself can be an independent, open source project), the implementations could serve as a useful evaluation tool for anyone considering web frameworks for their own applications. Ted Husted often uses MailReader for this purpose, and various frameworks used to come up with their own PetStore versions. Let's pick a set of web apps, agree on one back end implementation, and have the web framework authors show what their projects can deliver.

Posted by Hubert Rabago on October 30, 2007 at 12:06 PM MDT #

Congrats Matt, I didn't know you could read French :-)

Posted by Jean-Baptiste Quenot on October 31, 2007 at 05:54 AM MDT #

Hello Jacob , We looked at Facelets, it is a a very seducing add-on for JSF development but we also discovered some important question marks that lead us to temporarily descope Facelets for business application development (ie. long life applications maintained by contractors for a non IT company) : Compelling features we liked :
  • The improved debug info in development mode
  • Neat page design (compatible with HTML editors, templating, expression language, etc)
Question marks related to the project's community and the roadmap :
  • How strong is the community ?
    • Code seems to be written by almost only three persons : jhook, rlubke and youngm.
    • How Sun is involved in this project ? The classes are located in a com.sun.facelets package but no commiter works for Sun.
    • The bug tracking system is pretty anonymous (most issues are assigned to issues@facelets) and there are several very old priority P1 issues (older than one year)
  • What is the future of Facelets ?
    • Is there a roadmap published somewhere (most of the Apache projects have one) ?
    • How will it integrates with JSF 2 ?
    • What is the level of risk for the facelets project with this limited numbers of committers ?
If you have some insights on these question marks, we would be very interested.

Posted by Cyrille Le Clerc (Xebia) on October 31, 2007 at 10:33 AM MDT #

@ Hubert
Sure, there's a lot of things that would be nice. If only we'd have more time. I've spent almost every spare minute of the last 3 years on Wicket - either writing code, supporting the list ,or writing Wicket In Action - and *still* people are complaining they don't feel serviced enough. Documentation for instance... dozens of examples, almost complete Javadoc coverage, one book out, two more books in the making and partially available, a mailing list that's one of the most active on the web, a WIKI that's actively being maintained, several blogs, and STILL people complain about lack of documentation... very discouraging.

/end of complaining

Posted by Eelco Hillenius on November 02, 2007 at 09:27 PM MDT #

So if i read that right, they started with a team for wicket that had only seen wicket the night before? And they compete with a struts team that was completely setup with experienced struts developers?? And the bad point is only doc? (which is greatly addressed, if i see all the changes to wiki and the javadoc, i am always very curious what people exactly expect to find) Also they should compare unit testing of the wicket components against struts pages. I am very curious what they find then.

Posted by Johan Compagner on November 05, 2007 at 02:50 AM MST #

its a nice web to show our talents

Posted by maryam on January 05, 2008 at 06:08 AM MST #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: Allowed