Hi, I would just like to add something (maybe not my place but still) These type of question to me personally seem wrong to ask and here is why.
If I where to ask you what is better hammer or a screwdriver I am sure that you would respond by stating "it depends on the problem". Well so does here as well. Different frameworks have different audience. And with that in mind let me ask you a question. Do you think tapestry can serve **your** needs cause if it can then that is the tool you should use. Anyway just my two cents. Cheers On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 19:58:34 -0300, abdonn <abd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > hi, >> > > Hi! > > i'm thinkng about using tapestry on production but i have some concerns. >> more and more people are moving to js frameworks like angular or ember. in >> this approach tapestry's pages are no longer usefull >> > > They're still useful. You still need to render the initial HTML. You still > need to receive and send data to the clients. You cannot store much data > using JavaScript itself. > > There has been talk about moving almost all stuff from server-side to > client-side for years already. GWT, for example, was released 7 years ago. > And still the Google search is based on pages, not being a JavaScript > single-application, for example. > > but still tapestry is doing great at hosting assets. plugin for LESS and >> coffee, minifiers, caches etc are great. >> > > It sure is. :) Just a nitpick: the LESS, coffee, minifiers and cache > handling are not plugins, they're part of the Tapestry core. > > but we can't do everything on java side. currently front-end developers >> are using ruby with compass and sass to for their css >> > > As you just mentioned, Tapestry does that too (change LESS for SASS, which > are both languages that are compiled into CSS) and more. > > and nodeJS to unit test their javascript controllers >> > > So you can use Tapestry with Angular.js or Backbone.js or Ember some other > similar JS framework. And Ruby is as server-side as Tapestry, so, if you > think Tapestry is doomed, Ruby is doomed too. I really can't see your point > with the mentions to SASS and NodeJS for unit testing of JavaScript code, > specially because Node is server-side too. > > so the question is: can java side really compete with dedicated frontend >> tools. and if not, will there still be place for tapestry? >> > > Your question isn't about just about Tapestry, but almost any server-side > framework, Java or not. There will always be a place for client- and > server-side. The right amount of each is very dependent on the problem at > hand. There's no silver bullet and the best solution for a given scenario > is always dependent on the context. You'll always need code on the > server-side. And Tapestry makes it easy and quick (live class reloading!) > to write. ;) > > -- > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > users-unsubscribe@tapestry.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Sincerely *Boris Horvat*
