On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 9:50 AM Bob Harner <bobhar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe call it tapestry-components instead of tapestry-corelib, to be > clearer? > Good point. I just thought of corelib since it's the package name. Maybe tapestry-pages, to be clearer that everything concerning pages and components are there? tapestry-pages-components? I'm not feeling particularly inspired to find the ideal name now . . . > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020, 11:37 AM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < > thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 6:31 AM Ilya Obshadko <xf...@xfyre.com> wrote: > > > > > My application still runs on 5.4-beta-6 due to various breaking > component > > > changes introduced in later versions. > > > > > > The ones in the other thread? If not, please post them here so we can > > discuss them. > > > > > > > I'm quite happy with it, but I'm > > > getting concerned about outdated upstream dependencies (like > Hibernate). > > > > > > > Please file a Jira ticket about them. > > > > > > > So I did the following: > > > > > > - upgraded everything to 5.4.5, adding tapestry-core to exclusions > > > - added tapestry-core 5.4-beta-6 as a separate Maven dependency and > > > excluded its upstream dependencies to other components. > > > > > The resulting hybrid of 5.4.5 and 5.4-beta-6 seems to work fine > (although I > > > didn't test everything yet). > > > > > > I have a question to Thiago, Lance and other committers - do you guys > see > > > any potential issues with this approach? Anything I might be missing? > > > > > > > I don't see any potential issues, although I wouldn't guarantee they > > wouldn't happen, even if I think the probability is very low. > > > > > > > On a related note: would it be possible to consider releasing > > > *tapestry-corelib* (core components) as a completely separate artifact? > > > This would make the maintenance a ton easier for edge cases like mine > > (when > > > updating to the latest components has a prohibitive cost). > > > > > > > This is something we can do and it's been already suggested by someone > else > > in this mailing list which likes the Tapestry support for webapps > (request > > filters, dispatchers, resource support, etc), but doesn't actually use > > pages and components. Since there's a plan to support Java 9 modules, if > we > > want to do a tapestry-corelib, we should do it sooner rather than later. > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > -- > > > Ilya Obshadko > > > > > > > > > -- > > Thiago > > > -- Thiago
