I would rather keep the XML files around to *override* the annotations,
not because I can't use Java 5.0.
As for the use of JDK 5.0, well... this is a release that's a ... year
from now? And we'll have to maintain backwards compatibility with Java
1.1 or 1.2 or whatever at a time when - I think - most people are
actually thinking of moving forward. Now this debate has already
happenned... right?
I'm +1 to require JDK 5.0 but -1 to remove the XMLs but I guess we'll
have a lot of time to discuss that.
--
Ing. Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi
DTQ Software
Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
