On Dec 15, 9:56 pm, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it> wrote: > In any case, as I said, unfortunately you need to have some experience > in the NetBeans Platform in order to cut it down to a very small > infrastructure; and you need to do some boring configuration thing > (things are a bit easier if you work with Maven). Thus I understand that > if one is evaluating a simple desktop framework, he probably finds > (B)SAF more appealing. But indeed a cut down NetBeans platform is > probably as light as (B)SAF, but provides tools that will scale up a > lot. The missing parts (which are not code, but documentation, > distribution, etc...) would have costed to Sun much less than developing > SAF did. That's why I think SAF was an unfortunate strategy.
Hans Muller was very careful of adding features to SAF, always keeping it centralized around a uniform life cycle mechanism and cascading Actions. It's unfortunate that he was not allowed to finish it (got pulled into doing JavaFX stuff) but it really targets a completely different KISS application style than the NetBeans RCP does. It takes quite a long time to become fluent with NetBeans due to it's dynamic plugin nature, it's probably easier today given its evolution and the documentation effort carried out by Geertjan Wielenga etc. Knowing what I now know, I should've used the NetBeans RCP for one of our large MDI/MTI application suites at work, but at the time (2007) that really was not an option (Eclipse RCP was dismissed on the grounds of not working so well with web start, I wonder if the NetBeans RCP works better in such an environment?). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
