I looked into the issue with the start up time for Tapestry Portlets I was
having, and I added a JIRA issue for it. It seems like the initialisation of
the portlet is relatively short, but the initial render takes many seconds.
This is proably due to lazy initialisation meaning that a lot of the
Jesse Kuhnert gmail.com> writes:
>
> First I've heard of it. I didn't initially have plans on doing anything with
> it but I'd be happy to in order to save you from jsf. :)
>
> Whatever "it" is probably won't happen in the initial alpha release as I
> have some other items taking higher prior
Hi John, I faced the same issue and opted to create my own version of
the TapestryApplicationPortlet class so instead of creating a registry
per portlet instance it creates one per type of portlet (where I'm using
portletConfig.getPortletName() to distinguish type) so all portlet
instances of t
First I've heard of it. I didn't initially have plans on doing anything with
it but I'd be happy to in order to save you from jsf. :)
Whatever "it" is probably won't happen in the initial alpha release as I
have some other items taking higher priority, but if you start a jira issue
with some clea
I'm evaluating Tapestry, and facelets, for use in a Portlet based project. We
need to migrate an exsiting Servlet/JSP based application to Portlets.
Currently I'm leaning towards Tapestry, from a coding standpoint it seems much
cleaner to me. The only problem is the initial overhead when adding a
