Wouldn't it be rather normal to create a tapestry-tx that provided
transaction wrappers around existing services, much the way tapestry-
spring and tapestry-hibernate do? Especially now that there's a bit
more AOP going on in T5.
Christian.
On 20-May-08, at 17:00 , Thiago HP wrote:
On 5/20/08, Zheng, Xiahong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would use Spring to configure the type of services you are trying
to
provide to your pages. I am wondering if using Tapestry services
has any
advantages in this case.
1) Tapestry-IoC has a nicer way to describe services (even compared to
Spring's JavaConfig)
2) Tapestry-IoC has distributed configuration (see
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-ioc/configuration.html),
Spring doesn't.
The only thing that prevents me from using Tapestry-IoC for
configuring all my applications' objects (services) is Spring's
transaction management.
--
Thiago
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
