Migration from woodstock to richfaces

[Kavita Tipnis]

Since, Sun and/or Netbeans have officially announced their tie up with Richfaces, I am reconsidering going further with woodstock components for additional JSF development.
First, woodstock components are way less capable of providing a rich user experience similar to richfaces, not to mention a4j. Second visual web development framework sucks for complex web apps having custom components and other third party components.

However, one of my projects is already live and running fine with the visual web framework , I have a list of projects lined up that perform similar CRUD operations. A decision that I have to make is whether to sacrifice rich user interface and go with my current framework or create each project in a different framework(richfaces). I personally prefer the latter. I wanted any suggestions and pointers on this.

Also, related to overall JSF development , is it wise to have one web app with over 250 pages and backing beans or different modular web apps sharing common data via cookies and/or url rewriting? or any other ideas?

[Rahul Santha]

From maintenance perspective wouldn't it be easy to have everything under the same roof. If there is a compelling reason to split it into d different module with another framework/technology the you may opt to do so. My 2 cents.

[Kavita Tipnis]

I have different jsf web apps and I am sharing user info using CAS.
I found this to be manageable and also got rid of the visual web framework,
because it crashes when you have loads of heavy duty jsf going on.