One big difference is the usage of the Spring classes within Tapernate. This is just a difference of opinion/direction.
-----Original Message----- From: Hugo Palma [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:04 AM To: Tapestry users Subject: Honeycomb vs Tapernate or Honeycomb with Tapernate Hi all, i've just started thinking about how Tapestry is going to be used in a new project at work. One of the decisions is how the integration with hibernate is going to be implemented, i'm guessing 95% of Tapestry projects goes through this. With this in mind i took a look at Honeycomb and at Tapernate. They both look great and seem to provide just what i need to this project. Although this is good, it leaves me with a problem, which one ? As i look deeply into each one i find some differences in implementation/usage of the same feature, some features that are implemented in honeycomb and not tapernate and vice-versa, but mainly i see a project goal difference. It seems that honeycomb looks to not only provide integration with hibernate but with other libraries that might be useful in a web project, tapernate only goal is to implement the tapestry+hibernate integration. With this, some doubts came to mind. Why are there two projects for this ? Wouldn't it be better for both projects if they would join forces ? If so, shouldn't tapernate be included/merged into honeycombs hibernate integration ? What do you guys think ? Cheers Hugo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
