I hope everyone understands that T5 is still a long ways away from coming out. The T4.1 series has barely started to form a new API, let alone even an alpha release.
There will be many many iterative releases of the 4.1 series while all of that new functionality is figured out, and the old functionality that needs improvement is re-written. I wouldn't expect active development or support for T4 to go away for a very long time. There is a ~lot~ more development activity in tapestry now that doesn't necessarily involve Howard at all. There will be even more in the coming weeks. When we finish with the TLP move I'm sure there will be even more. So, in conclusion, Howard not working on T4 doesn't mean that T4 is dead. He's already expressed intentions of hoping to get some of the new T5 features into T4 (where it makes sense). For the most part, the "grand vision" for T4 has already been laid out and designed. Now we just have to keep moving it forward with bug fixes / feature enhancements / etc. There is starting to be more than enough development activity that we can afford to have Howard working on the next generation of the framework. (Which is still desperately needed in order for us to gain a wider audience of users, mostly involving finally killing off the inheritance chain.) I hope that puts some fears to rest. The preference of liking or not liking XML isn't something I can answer to, only the fact that whatever people are worried about isn't happening for a very long time now anyways so there shouldn't be as ~much~ cause for concern, unless you fundamentally disagree with the design..In that case you should pop over to the development list and make yourself heard :) On 4/10/06, Geoff Longman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There was a general vote on abandoning support for JDK < 1.5 when the > ideas for T5 were originally floated.. but I'm not sure that ditching > the xml was included in that discussion. > > I'm ok with losing the xml because I have already put in a suggestion > not to lose the xml! :-) > > I was thinking we "lose the xml" in it's current form as an > alternative to the annotations you can use today. Keep the bit's of > the xml that allow one to not have to use a whole lot of @This and > @That in the templates. > > So, in my mind I see the <component> tags being the only thing that > remains in the xml and the whole file be completely optional. > > Further, I suggested that xml files, if kept, would play a much less > prominent role. A role more akin to the .properties files for > internationalization. > > Ie. > > Foo.class (w/annotations) > + Foo.html is the minimum needed to build a page > > and if you want to "decruftify" the template, simply drop Foo.page in > the same loc as the template and put <component> tags in it. > > Does this make sense? > > Geoff > > On 4/10/06, Bryan Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Same feelings here. I *like* the xml binding files and I'm not wild > > about mixing too many presentation details in with my java code. > > (Although I suspect there would be some benefits like compiler type > > checking.) > > > > > > Mike Snare wrote: > > > > >I hope not. That would be horrible. There's a good segment of us > > >still using java 1.4 who would be significantly annoyed at that, and > > >for good reason. > > > > > >I know that the tap developers don't tend to concern themselves with > > >backward compatibility, but it seems you should try to *build* a user > > >base -- not replace it wholesale. > > > > > >I really hope this statement is wrong. > > > > > >-Mike > > > > > >On 4/10/06, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >>I just read on > > >>http://www.virtuas.com/files/JavaWebFrameworkSweetSpots.pdf that T5 > will > > >>not have any XML configuration option any more, only annotations. > > >>Is this true? > > >> > > >>MARK > > >> > > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>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 > Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman > Other interests: http://www.squidoo.com/spaceelevator/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Jesse Kuhnert Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://opennotion.com
