Lenny, Everytime someone from Atos ask me this question, I answer "yes for liferay". As we have already numbers of portlet deploy in this portlet container, we haven't see any limitation from now.
For other portlet container, I am pretty sure this bridge will work fine as long as the portlet container implements MARKUP_HEADER. This will avoid adding any js twice for any portal page that use more than one portlet instance. Regarding your needs. Portlet Containers have the following avantages: + content aggregation (you will be able to mix content that come any web framework ) + use features provided by the container (cms, workflow, user management etc..) + personnalization made easy by drag and drop and the following disavantage - in order to work inside a portlet container you need the bridge have to generate dirty url. so url rewriting have to be manage by portal. - cache, user management, has also to be managed by the portal - portal introduce overhead 20% mem and cpu - you will need trainning in order to well manage your portal and you will have to train your users to avoid disaster. 2012/10/17 Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us>: > François, > Do you think that got5-portlet is ready to use in production? > Thanks. > > > > On Oct 16, 2012, at 2:12 PM, François Facon <francois.fa...@atos.net> wrote: > >> Hi Markus, >> >> Your experience in developping portlet with tapestry is very interesting. >> >> Currently, we return PortletRenderable object and PortalPage object >> to display another tapestry page in the current portlet or to request >> the portlet container to redirect the user to another page of the >> portlet container. did you try to use those object during an >> activation phase whithout success? >> >> About returning stream response during activation, I can't see the >> related usage. >> could you give more details about that point? >> >> Freundlich grüßt >> François >> >> 2012/10/16 Markus Feindler <markus.feind...@gmx.de>: >>> Hm, it's hard to say since there are some basic features which don't >>> function in the "bridge" (like returning a page or stream response in >>> onactivate). >>> >>> I wouldn't recommend using it. >>> >>>> >>>> -------- Original-Nachricht -------- >>>> Datum: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:09:59 -0400 >>>> Von: Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us> >>>> An: "Tapestry users" <users@tapestry.apache.org> >>>> Betreff: Re: Tapestry-Portlet status? >>>> >>>> Thanks, I know it exists, but not sure it's ready for >>>> production use, >>>> hence the question if T5-portlet is something I should be using in >>>> production >>>> >>>> On Oct 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Lenny Primak wrote: >>>> >>>>> I heard something about Tapestry supporting the Portlet spec. >>>>> Is Tapestry going to support it out of the box or is Tapestry-Portlet >>>> ready to use in production? >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
