Em Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:30:41 -0200, Kalle Korhonen
<kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com> escreveu:
to use and integrate on their so from my perspective, Spring is just
another layer of indirection that I'm campaigning to remove (and I say
that having used Spring extensively for years in multiple projects).
I agree completely. Tapestry-IoC's distributed configuration, for me, is
valuable and powerful enough to try to get rid of Spring, and I didn't
even talk about how Tapestry-IoC's configuration sintax is nicer than
Spring's. The only reason I still use it is the transaction management.
Having time to implement something similar in Tapestry-IoC is in my
wishlist (tapestry-hibernate and @CommitAfter are not enough, as they're
tied to Hibernate), but I don't know when Santa will give me that . . .
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
and instructor
Owner, software architect and developer, Ars Machina Tecnologia da
Informação Ltda.
http://www.arsmachina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
