Hi everybody, I think the discussion on TheServerSide actually is somewhat interesting, but not because of the unfortunate Tapestry vs. Wicket flame war. Let's have a look at the topic leading to that...
- One part of Java EE 6 is "CDI" (JSR 299) - http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=299 - originally called "Web beans". I think it was inspired by Gavin Kings Seam Framework. - The reference implementation for that seems to be something called "Weld" - http://docs.jboss.org/weld/reference/1.0.0/en-US/html/ - Weld has Wicket support build in, and the examples are given in Wicket (although the Java EE "standard" would be JSF 2) because Wicket is easier to learn than JSF (at least Gavin King says so in http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/HowToStartLearningJavaEE6, but I think many would agree with that). So the interesting (to me, at least) questions are: - How does CDI relate to Tapesty and Tapestry IOC? - Should / could Tapestry incorporate / conform to CDI somehow? - Should we try to add Tapestry support to Weld? - Or is Java EE 6 / CDI just not relevant to Tapestry? I haven't really looked at Web Beans resp. CDI yet, but from first site, it defines some context scopes (request, session, application, conversation) and some annotation based dependency injection. Both areas are already covered by Tapestry (although afaik there is no conversation scope (yet) in Tapestry). So are CDI and Tapestry mutually exclusive? Or should Tapestry be refactored to use standard CDI annotations, so it can claim to be a CDI / JSR 299 implementation? I would love to hear your opinions about that. Regards, Lutz -- altocon GmbH http://www.altocon.de/ Software Development, Consulting Hamburg, Germany --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
