That being said, Scott, it *is* much easier to "plug in" to Tapestry using HiveMind, since Tapestry itself is wired together using HiveMind.
-----Original Message----- From: Scott Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 8:41 PM To: users@tapestry.apache.org Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5 I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate. Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users (like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that integrate the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk about that on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for your database persistence then you don't need to worry about it. Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it is used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use it if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown solution if you want. regards, Scott On Sunday 25 June 2006 10:05, kranga wrote: > We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3 > and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I > am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project. > > My questions are: > - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that you > don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it look > like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone know > if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its user-base > size and popularity when compared with Spring? > > - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that > would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the > 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is > negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt the > framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost impossible > to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a > low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and > require significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out > there? > > - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on > their website does look impressive. > > Your thoughts are appreciated... > KR > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
