Thanks Thiago, always fast and clear. So clear that I will ask something (maybe basic) I don't get. They say wicket is better in the component model, they talk about "dynamic component model" where tapestry is static. What does it mean? I paste here the answer I got from a user, I hate wicket urls, and he answered this:
--- “Ugly URLs” because stateful pages are session relative. And yes, there are easy ways to customize this, including from Wicket. T5 creates friendly URLs by default, but at the cost of things that Wicket provides and T5 doesn’t (like a dynamic component model, stateful pojo programming model, security by default, etc). --- Thanks again! On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:28:40 -0200, Alfonso Quiroga < > alfonsose...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! I read some reviews about wicket and they say one adventage (over >> tapestry) is the possibility of packaging a component in a JAR file. This >> is not possible in T5? >> > > This is absolutely possible. Not only that, you can package pages and > mixins too. This post by Igor exemplifies that: > http://blog.tapestry5.de/index.php/2010/01/19/tapestry-ioc-modularization-of-web-applications-without-osgi/ > . > > > I am confused because t5-upload it's a JAR file that has it's own module, >> but I don't know if there are components inside. >> > > This JAR contains the Upload component. > > -- > 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 > >
