Rob, We're making headway.
So, you acknowledge that Tapestry is a good framework. Your major complaint is the lack of backward compatibility between major releases. I don't think anyone in the community will disagree that this is an annoyance, so it comes down to whether or not it is acceptable for each user. Six years ago I built an application for a client using plain servlets, JSP's, entity and stateful session EJB's, RMI, and other fun stuff. It served my client well in spite of some "sharp edges". Last year, they wanted to re-invest and I scrapped the whole UI and redid it with Tapestry, and replaced the entity EJB's with Hibernate. It was the most cost-effective way of moving forward even though I threw out 75% of the code. This year, I moved from T4->T5 as they continue to re-invest, and it makes more money for them. Should I have stayed with the old technology? Not a chance. But it's only been six years! (at the time, it was only 4.5 years) You state that there are better frameworks. I'm sure that there are for some kinds of problems, and that is where users must evaluate their options. As a blanket statement it cannot be accurate. So now comes the big question: Given that you point out the obvious with regard to backward compatibility, you have no intention of using Tapestry for serious work, you do not give assistance to users, nor do you request assistance from other users, why do you post to this list? I evaluated Struts at one point, and I have a book on shelf about Struts. I can't imagine hanging out on their user list saying, "Get out of the stone age, use Tapestry instead!" That's how I feel about Struts, but I trust that each Struts user is there because THE LIST suits their needs. Seriously Rob, what is your motivation? Jonathan > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Smeets [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 10:41 AM > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: T5: beta? > > Well, I'm not disputing the fact that Tapestry is a good framework but all > what I'm saying is the fact that at every major release there must be a > whole rewrite from scratch with little or no regard to backward > compatibility seems to me not a tool for prime time, or serious stuffs > besides a Hello world applications. I consider Tapestry a tool for > experimentation at the labs or schools where students are knowledge hungry > to learn new things. If your business is based on a model that looks into > the future then I'm afraid you'll be sorry to go with Tapestry. Because > every year when you want to benefit from the evolution in Webframework > technology, you'll have to start all over again- in otherwords throw away > your earlier investment. Tapestry is good but there are far more better > and > excellent frameworks out there with genius people behind it that at each > major release they face the challenge of backward compatibility head on > and > make everyone happy. They don't choose the easy route of starting all over > again. That one even first year computer science students can do. > > Your's friendly, > > Rob > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Jonathan Barker < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Rob, > > > > You may have a point or two. > > > > That what you describe as one of the best Internet applications has beta > > status suggests that some beta code is as good as / better that other > > production code. I would have to agree. I've had production apps > running > > on Tapestry alpha code for some time. > > > > The length of time that Gmail has been in beta is, however, a cop-out. > To > > me, it's Google's way of saying, "Don't blame us." Come on Google, > stand > > behind your application! I suspect that will change as they market more > > heavily to small business. > > > > It would have been more useful had you picked another application > > framework > > to compare to Tapestry for stability and time in beta. Perhaps next > time. > > > > That you personally don't do anything with Tapestry beyond a Hello World > > application... oh, never mind, that's too easy a target. > > > > FYI, .02 cent = $0.0002 > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Rob Smeets [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:06 AM > > > To: Tapestry users > > > Subject: Re: T5: beta? > > > > > > Guys, stop the exagerations. Gmail, one of the best Internet > application > > > ever written still has a beta status. Unlike Tapestry, Gmail has had > > the > > > beta status for years and would therefore trust it more than Tapestry > > > which > > > I personally won't do anything serious with it beyond a little bit > more > > > advanced Hello world application. > > > > > > My .02 cent. > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Blower, Andy > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The fact that you're using T5 in the real world at this beta stage > is > > > very > > > > good news for the upcoming release IMO, even if it delays the RC a > > bit. > > > (not > > > > too much though I hope ;-) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: 09 April 2008 19:32 > > > > > To: Tapestry users > > > > > Subject: Re: T5: beta? > > > > > > > > > > We're still not making a big deal; the transition from alpha to > beta > > > > > affects us more than the rest of the world. I think we'll > probably > > > > > start seeing a new branch for 5.0 work and a switch-over of trunk > to > > > > > 5.1 pretty soon. > > > > > > > > > > In the meantime, I'm using 5.0.12 for a client project and finding > a > > > > > fair amount of rough edges and minor bugs. I'd just as soon take > > care > > > > > of those in parallel with the client project since the end result > is > > a > > > > > far more useable and finished 5.0 final. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > > > 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]
