I know why the LOLs came. I and many others have seen this discussion rise and fade many times over the last 5 years or so. So many times that I don't have the energy to join the debate anymore. I personally don't (need/want/care about) this behaviour.
Things like bugs/enhancements posted on the list generally are not actioned until they get into Jira anyways. As it was Howard jumped in right after my post and retiterated (as he has many times in the past) why Tapestry does not allow this behaviour. Besides if *everyone* indicated on the issue thier interest, perhaps something might happen. or maybe not. Geoff On 1/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know why LOLs got dropped on you, but maybe this has something to > do with it. Howard Ship posted this about a week ago. I'm still > scratching my head over it... > > "The scalability that Tapestry gets because of its rigid page and > component structure is one of its clear differentiators; something > I've heard that the JSF Expert Group is envious about. The structure > is rigid, the behavior is highly dynamic. That's good enough for > almost everyone. > > What I expect to do in a later release of Tapestry is change and > simplify the APIs so that it doesn't even look like something you can > or should do. > > Howard M. Lewis Ship" > > > > > > > Raul Raja Martinez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: news <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 01/28/2006 03:06 AM > Please respond to > "Tapestry users" <tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org> > > > To > tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org > cc > > Subject > Re: tapestry not really component based? > > > > > > > are the laughs because feature requests in Jira are ignored? > > Ron Piterman wrote: > > lol > > Ron > > > > > > Geoff Longman wrote: > >> add a feature request to jira. > >> > >> Geoff > >> > >> On 1/27/06, Raul Raja Martinez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> It looks like the ability to dynamically add components is something > >>> that a lot of people have asked for. Are there any plans to include > this > >>> feature in the future? > >>> > >>> Ivano wrote: > >>> > >>>> I understand the problem better now. > >>>> > >>>> Probably what happens is that people used to work with Java on web > >>>> (with > >>>> JSP, JSTL, Struts, and so on) sees tapestry as one of the first > >>>> component-based approach to web development. > >>>> And if you compare that with previously available java web > >>>> frameworks it > >>>> really is a *tremendous* improvement. > >>>> People used to work with ASP have a different perspective, being > >>>> able to > >>>> compare that component technology with Tap, and I actually think > >>>> this is > >>>> good, since it could bring improvements in Tapestry development path. > >>>> Summing it all up I think we all should appreciate your kind of > >>>> considerations, as long as they're not only useless critics. > >>>> My opinion here. > >>>> > >>>> Bye bye. > >>>> > >>>> Ivano Pagano. > >>>> > >>>> gaz jones wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> i just wanted to get some opinions on it really and see if others > were > >>>>> having the same problem etc... the problem that patrick described is > >>>>> exactly > >>>>> the thing that was bugging me... i wanted to add links and i had to > >>>>> shoe > >>>>> horn them in rather than use the predefined component and it just > felt > >>>>> wrong > >>>>> because that is what a component based architecture is for surely! > >>>>> > >>>>> however there are lots of people who seem to say they just get used > to > >>>>> the > >>>>> tapestry way of doing things... fair enough. i can accept that the > >>>>> framework > >>>>> doesnt work in the same way as others do, and like mike said there > are > >>>>> a LOT > >>>>> of things to like about tapestry, and the pros definately outweigh > the > >>>>> cons. > >>>>> > >>>>> ill be interested to see how it develops in 4.1... until then i'll > >>>>> just keep > >>>>> posting messages about not being able to add components dynamically > >>>>> every > >>>>> few weeks :P > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> The Spindle guy. http://spindle.sf.net > >> Get help with Spindle: > >> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/spindle-user > >> Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman > >> Feature Updates: http://spindle.sf.net/updates > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- The Spindle guy. http://spindle.sf.net Get help with Spindle: http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/spindle-user Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman Feature Updates: http://spindle.sf.net/updates --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
