Re: About T5 integration modules
Howard, I agree with you but I don't think that is the issue here. The question was how come with Frameworks such as Wicket there is an explosion of integration modules written and well documented whereas in Tapestry there is only a handful. Is this because Tapestry is too complex for achieving such goals? On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote: While it's true that other frameworks (Grails, Wicket, Rails) have large numbers of integrations, if you talk to real developers you find out that the majority of those integrations are not actually usable for production work. All too often, they are orphaned, unsupported, incomplete, naive or coded against an earlier version of the core framework ... or some combination of all of those. I do a lot of training and consulting on Tapestry with a lot of groups and what I find is that one size does not fit all, even for simple things like user authentication/login. I'm quite happy to have a limited number of basic integrations that are documented, supported and tested. Would I like every application to just be a matter of mixing pre-built modules together? Yes. Do I think it is realistic, for ANY framework? No. On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote: Noe, I've been down this path before, regrettably. The ONLY thing to do it to ignore the trolls. On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Newham, Cameron cameron.new...@bl.uk wrote: I don't agree with the OP that the ServerSide discussion shows Tapestry has lost the battle - two posters state they don't want to see Tapestry mentioned. That's all there is. However, I can't agree with you Thiago. The old saying is if you say it enough times then people will believe it is true. If you are just going to stand by and let trolls post bad things about Tapestry unchallenged then they have won the argument - regardless of how bad their argument may be and how incorrect their views may be. After all, someone pitching up and wanting a framework will read what they've written and believe it. Who is to say these anti-Tapestry people are wrong? Not you - because you won't counter their arguments! :-) Sure - don't feed the trolls. But all that is necessary is to say something positive; not engage them in an argument. Merry Xmas everyone. -Original Message- From: Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo [mailto:thiag...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 December 2009 15:26 To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Discussion Em Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:45:20 -0200, Banchi Liko banchi...@gmail.com escreveu: Hi guys, Hi! There is a discussion going on here http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=58858 and seems like Tapestry ihas already been ruled out as a viable and serious web framework. TheServerSide comments has too many trolls to have a good, reasonable discussion there. Wicket seems to be the favorite. Some people who bother to post there like Wicket. Most people who like Tapestry, maybe all of them, don't bother to post there. I'm sad Tapestry has lost the battle and afraid it might die soon. Please source or explain your statements or you'll be treated like a troll here. Please go and contribute and let your voice be heard before Tapestry dies a horrible death. No, thank you. Posting there will not change Tapestry's fate. Using it, exchanging ideas in the mailing lists and contributing code will (and already is). -- 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator of Apache Tapestry The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! (971) 678-5210 http://howardlewisship.com -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator of Apache Tapestry The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! (971) 678-5210 http://howardlewisship.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: About T5 integration modules
Hello, And what about integration of Tapestry in other framework ? From my experience view, integrating technologies in Tapestry is fun and fast, and the one provided by Tapestry are really good and enough to do what a Web Application should do. !but when i want to do the inverse i am facing a problem with Tapestry public API. Getting the Tapestry registry is simple but calling services from the outside is not as easy. For exemple, currently i am trying to secure my application by using spring-security to centralize security concerns, and then create a RoleVoter to secure also Tapestry URLs. To achieve this, Spring allows me to access to the servlet context and then to Tapestry Registry, now we can imagine that analyzing the URL will be as easy as using the ComponentEventLinkEncoder service, but in real i had to create an instance of RequestImpl, retrieve others services, set the request into the RequestGlobals... service just to analyze the URL ! Tapestry is so powerful and has everything to work standalone (see wrappers around servlet API, or PageTester, ...), but sometimes it's hard to exploit this great feature ... Best Regards, Christophe 2009/12/23 Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com While it's true that other frameworks (Grails, Wicket, Rails) have large numbers of integrations, if you talk to real developers you find out that the majority of those integrations are not actually usable for production work. All too often, they are orphaned, unsupported, incomplete, naive or coded against an earlier version of the core framework ... or some combination of all of those. I do a lot of training and consulting on Tapestry with a lot of groups and what I find is that one size does not fit all, even for simple things like user authentication/login. I'm quite happy to have a limited number of basic integrations that are documented, supported and tested. Would I like every application to just be a matter of mixing pre-built modules together? Yes. Do I think it is realistic, for ANY framework? No. On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote: Noe, I've been down this path before, regrettably. The ONLY thing to do it to ignore the trolls. On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Newham, Cameron cameron.new...@bl.uk wrote: I don't agree with the OP that the ServerSide discussion shows Tapestry has lost the battle - two posters state they don't want to see Tapestry mentioned. That's all there is. However, I can't agree with you Thiago. The old saying is if you say it enough times then people will believe it is true. If you are just going to stand by and let trolls post bad things about Tapestry unchallenged then they have won the argument - regardless of how bad their argument may be and how incorrect their views may be. After all, someone pitching up and wanting a framework will read what they've written and believe it. Who is to say these anti-Tapestry people are wrong? Not you - because you won't counter their arguments! :-) Sure - don't feed the trolls. But all that is necessary is to say something positive; not engage them in an argument. Merry Xmas everyone. -Original Message- From: Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo [mailto:thiag...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 December 2009 15:26 To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Discussion Em Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:45:20 -0200, Banchi Liko banchi...@gmail.com escreveu: Hi guys, Hi! There is a discussion going on here http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=58858 and seems like Tapestry ihas already been ruled out as a viable and serious web framework. TheServerSide comments has too many trolls to have a good, reasonable discussion there. Wicket seems to be the favorite. Some people who bother to post there like Wicket. Most people who like Tapestry, maybe all of them, don't bother to post there. I'm sad Tapestry has lost the battle and afraid it might die soon. Please source or explain your statements or you'll be treated like a troll here. Please go and contribute and let your voice be heard before Tapestry dies a horrible death. No, thank you. Posting there will not change Tapestry's fate. Using it, exchanging ideas in the mailing lists and contributing code will (and already is). -- 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:
Re: Number Formatting in TextField (T5)
Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:09:03 -0200, Benny Law benny.mk@gmail.com escreveu: Hi Thiago, Hi! I just thought of another idea and would like to bounce it off you. Instead of subclassing AbstractTextField to create NumericField, I can just use TextField as is, but define a new binding prefix for the translate parameter which will allow the format pattern to be specified as the binding expression, like this: t:textfield t:id=latitude translate=numberformat:0.0 / This is very clever! I guess it'll work. :) Just pay attention that the parameter received by the translate is a FieldTranslator, not a Translator itself. -- 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
Re: About T5 integration modules
Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 07:40:09 -0200, Gerald Bauer gtat...@gmail.com escreveu: I agree with you but I don't think that is the issue here. The question was how come with Frameworks such as Wicket there is an explosion of integrationmodules written and well documented whereas in Tapestry there is only a handful. Is this because Tapestry is too complex for achieving such goals? No. Some years ago, when Tapestry was still in its 5.0.5 version (pre-pre-pre-alpha), I wrote a very simple Hibernate integration package in Tapestry-IoC, including automatic transaction management. I was a complete T-IoC newbie then. I wrote it in 8 hours, most of them dealing with the transaction management itself, not with T-IoC. Summary of the reasons Tapestry and Tapestry-IoC don't have the same number of integrations as Wicket, as discussed recently in http://old.nabble.com/Discussion-to26889452s302.html: 1) Someone has to write them. Time is needed for this. 2) Wicket is way older (4.5 years vs 1.5 years), so the Wicket people had 3x more time to write them than the Tapestry people. 3) More people use Wicket than Tapestry (I don't have any figures), so the total amount of time for writing integrations is larger. Sometimes, technology-related issues have non-technology causes. And sometimes the best option is not the mostly used. Example: Struts until some time ago, JSF now. -- 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
Tapestry URL Rewriting Support and form submit
Hello. I have create one simple rule for url rewriting. as described in manual http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5.1/guide/url-rewriting.html All works fine except submit action. Tapestry redirect to rewrite page except original if submit action occurs. Example: rule: rewrite /test to /testRewrited urls looks like /test until submit action occurs after submit it looks /testRewrited if I'am not define return page in onSuccess() page method. It seems like a bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: About T5 integration modules
Thiago, every time I see your solutions and the easyness with which you find them I wonder how you have learned to use Tapestry. Do you are involved in design and development of Tapestry core ? Are you a committer that hase learned by using it? Knowing that could really show the way to others , wouldn't it ? Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo ha scritto: Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 07:40:09 -0200, Gerald Bauer gtat...@gmail.com escreveu: I agree with you but I don't think that is the issue here. The question was how come with Frameworks such as Wicket there is an explosion of integrationmodules written and well documented whereas in Tapestry there is only a handful. Is this because Tapestry is too complex for achieving such goals? No. Some years ago, when Tapestry was still in its 5.0.5 version (pre-pre-pre-alpha), I wrote a very simple Hibernate integration package in Tapestry-IoC, including automatic transaction management. I was a complete T-IoC newbie then. I wrote it in 8 hours, most of them dealing with the transaction management itself, not with T-IoC. Summary of the reasons Tapestry and Tapestry-IoC don't have the same number of integrations as Wicket, as discussed recently in http://old.nabble.com/Discussion-to26889452s302.html: 1) Someone has to write them. Time is needed for this. 2) Wicket is way older (4.5 years vs 1.5 years), so the Wicket people had 3x more time to write them than the Tapestry people. 3) More people use Wicket than Tapestry (I don't have any figures), so the total amount of time for writing integrations is larger. Sometimes, technology-related issues have non-technology causes. And sometimes the best option is not the mostly used. Example: Struts until some time ago, JSF now. -- == dott. Ivano Mario Luberti Archimede Informatica societa' cooperativa a r. l. Sede Operativa Via Gereschi 36 - 56126- Pisa tel.: +39-050- 580959 tel/fax: +39-050-9711344 web: www.archicoop.it == - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry URL Rewriting Support and form submit
Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:14:10 -0200, Sergey Kashin ayr...@ngs.ru escreveu: Hello. Hi! All works fine except submit action. Tapestry redirect to rewrite page except original if submit action occurs. Example: rule: rewrite /test to /testRewrited Are you rewriting /test.form to /testRewrited.form, for example? URL rewriting is trickier than it sounds. ;) Please post your rule implementation here so we can take a look at it. :) -- 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
Re: Discussion
Il 23/12/2009 19:48, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo ha scritto: Em Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:22:49 -0200, Piero Sartini I don't like it as well - but tapestry should provide an alternative. Maybe the question is if tapestry wants to be a full-stack framework or just deliver some building blocks. For being a full-stack framework, there is not enough functionality available. To just provide building blocks, it dictates too much (javascript library, markup, and so on). Of course this is just my feeling. I cannot speak for the project, but I think Tapestry tries to be a Web framework, not a full stack. At least not yet. ;) Regarding this topics, let me remind the ML people that there are at least two projects that tries to supply Tapestry 5 with the remaining components needed to build a full-stack framework (or something like that): Tynamo (formerly known as Trails) and AppFuse. T5 can be a simple framework but Tynamo and AppFuse are much more than this. Looking at T5 from this perspective, it looks very good. T5 should/could supply us with just the fundamental blocks and Tynamo/AppFuse could/should do the rest. Also, it should be much easier to manage the whole dev process in this way. I think that what the newbie (like me) and the end-user/dev are expecting from T5+Tynamo is something like a Drupal on steroids: a empty CMS (coming from a Maven archetype) that can be easily configured (like Drupal) and extended (Drupal is a pain to modify and extend, when used for big and complex projects). In other words, a empty system than can be used as a good starting point for a real-world (that is: quite complex) web application. Such a Maven archetype should supply all of the basic building blocks of a real-world application: - access control (Acegi/Spring security or something like that) - i18n/i10n and language switching - persistance (against MySQL, for example) - user registration - user administration - captcha? - e-mail verification (send/verify) - etc. To the end-user should remain the responsability to de/activate every single feature and to configure them. Such a system, being based on a well-engineered technology like T5, would be immensely easier to extend and modify than CMSs like Drupal and immensely more robust. As long as I can see, T5 and Tynamo are already evolving together in this way. It is just a matter of time to have such a Drupal-on-steroids archetype. As Piero said, at the moment T5 is probably enforcing some choice that could/should be left to the end-user/dev (javascript library, markup, etc.) but, as long as I can see, it should not be very hard to loosen such requisites in future releases. Dojo and JQuery can already be used together with T5 (cannot they?) and allowing the dev to use a different mark-up should be just a matter to accept a different XML namespace (a superset of the T5's). Am I wrong? JM2C -- Alessandro Bottoni Website: http://www.alessandrobottoni.it/ Perfection is finally attained not when there is no longer anything to add but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
RE: Example of overriding the default ValidationDecorator
Unfortunately it seems that it does not help against these error-
bubbles.
To override the client side you'll need to read tapestry.js and follow some of
what it does. Personally I feel that the error bubbles should not be part of
the T5 core, but an optional example validation module.
I created an inline validation decorator which puts the validation messages
inside the field labels (for accessibility reasons) and overrode parts of
tapestry.js in a js file added in our page layout so it comes on every page.
Removing and changing the client side validation functions. Compare with the
std tapestry.js versions and hopefully it will help you.
The js looks like this:
Tapestry.FormEventManager.addMethods(
{
initialize : function(form)
{
this.form = $(form);
this.form.onsubmit =
this.handleSubmit.bindAsEventListener(this);
},
handleSubmit : function(domevent)
{
var t = $T(this.form);
t.validationError = false;
this.form.fire(Tapestry.FORM_PREPARE_FOR_SUBMIT_EVENT,
this.form);
// This flag can be set to prevent the form from submitting
normally.
// This is used for some Ajax cases where the form submission
must
// run via Ajax.Request.
if (this.preventSubmission)
{
// Prevent the normal submission.
Event.stop(domevent);
// Instead ...
this.form.fire(Tapestry.FORM_PROCESS_SUBMIT_EVENT);
return false;
}
// Validation is OK, not doing Ajax, continue as planned.
return true;
}
});
Tapestry.FieldEventManager.addMethods(
{
initialize : function(field)
{
this.field = $(field);
var id = this.field.id;
this.label = $(id + '-label');
this.icon = $(id + '-icon');
this.translator = Prototype.K;
document.observe(Tapestry.FOCUS_CHANGE_EVENT, function(event)
{
// If changing focus *within the same form* then
perform validation.
// Note that Tapestry.currentFocusField does not change
// until after the FOCUS_CHANGE_EVENT notification.
if (Tapestry.currentFocusField == this.field
this.field.form == event.memo.form) {
this.validateInput();
}
}.bindAsEventListener(this));
},
// Removes validation decorations if present.
removeDecorations : function()
{
this.field.removeClassName(t-error);
if (this.label) {
this.icon.hide();
this.label.insert(this.icon);
var errorMsgId = this.field.id + ':error';
if (!this.errorMessage) {
this.errorMessage = $(errorMsgId);
}
if (this.errorMessage) {
Element.remove(this.errorMessage);
this.errorMessage = null;
}
}
},
/**
* Show a validation error message, which will add decorations to the
* field and it label.
* @param message validation message to display
*/
showValidationMessage : function(message)
{
$T(this.field).validationError = true;
$T(this.field.form).validationError = true;
this.field.addClassName(t-error);
if (this.label) {
var errorMsgId = this.field.id + ':error';
if (!this.errorMessage) {
this.errorMessage = $(errorMsgId);
}
if (!this.errorMessage) {
this.errorMessage = new Element('span', {'id':
errorMsgId, 'class': 't-error'});
this.label.insert({ bottom: this.errorMessage});
}
this.errorMessage.update(message);
this.errorMessage.insert({top: this.icon});
this.icon.show();
}
}
});
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Discussion
Alfonso Quiroga wrote: ³Last, it would be good more components (ui components).² +1 , plus it really would be nice if it comes before the above javascript/prototype/jquery implementation/change: ³There's a plan not to switch from Prototype to jQuery. There's a plan to have JavaScript stacks, one implemented with Prototype, another with jQuery. No dates yet.² How much javascript are the developers here using? I prefer to use only when necessary (yeah, I¹m one that runs from it like from the devil :-)) Merry Christmas to everyone on the list.
Re: Number Formatting in TextField (T5)
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo thiag...@gmail.com wrote: This is very clever! I guess it'll work. :) Just pay attention that the parameter received by the translate is a FieldTranslator, not a Translator itself. Thanks Thiago. I already found out the hard way, but it's basically working now :) The last thing I still need to figure out is the purpose of FieldTranslator (I read the doc but still didn't fully get it) and how I can allow the error messages to be overridden in the message catalogue on a per field basis in the standard manner. I guess I need to use some other service to do that. Any hint will be appreciated :)
Re: Tapestry URL Rewriting Support and form submit
Thanks for fast reply. You're absolutely right! I'am not rewrite .form. Big thanks! On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:01:22 -0200 Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo thiag...@gmail.com wrote: Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:14:10 -0200, Sergey Kashin ayr...@ngs.ru escreveu: Hello. Hi! All works fine except submit action. Tapestry redirect to rewrite page except original if submit action occurs. Example: rule: rewrite /test to /testRewrited Are you rewriting /test.form to /testRewrited.form, for example? URL rewriting is trickier than it sounds. ;) Please post your rule implementation here so we can take a look at it. :) -- 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry URL Rewriting Support and form submit
upss.. not solved
i have two pages
/test/testpage
and
/rewrited_tst/testpage
if i browse
/test/testpage
rewrite works correctly:
url looks like /test/testpage
and processed
/rewrited_tst/testpage
if i click submit button in form (name frm in page)
rewrite works not correctly:
url looks like /rewrited_tst/testpage but i expect url
like /test/testpage
all other processed correctly
/rewrited_tst/testpage and expect /rewrited_tst/testpage
my rewrite rule:
URLRewriterRule rule2 = new URLRewriterRule()
{
public Request process(Request request,
URLRewriteContext context)
{
final String path = request.getPath();
if (path.equalsIgnoreCase(/test/testpage))
{
request = new
SimpleRequestWrapper(request, /rewrited_tst/testpage);
}
if
(path.equalsIgnoreCase(/test/testpage.frm))
{
request = new
SimpleRequestWrapper(request,
/rewrited_tst/testpage.frm);
}
return request;
}
public RewriteRuleApplicability applicability()
{
return RewriteRuleApplicability.INBOUND;
}
};
configuration.add(rule2, rule2);
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 23:48:01 +0600
Sergey Kashin ayr...@ngs.ru wrote:
Thanks for fast reply.
You're absolutely right!
I'am not rewrite .form.
Big thanks!
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:01:22 -0200
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo thiag...@gmail.com
wrote:
Em Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:14:10 -0200, Sergey Kashin
ayr...@ngs.ru escreveu:
Hello.
Hi!
All works fine except submit action. Tapestry redirect
to rewrite page
except original
if submit action occurs.
Example:
rule: rewrite /test to /testRewrited
Are you rewriting /test.form to /testRewrited.form, for
example? URL rewriting is trickier than it sounds. ;)
Please post your rule implementation here so we can take
a look at it. :)
--
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
-
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
Re: About T5 integration modules
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 2:09 AM, cordenier christophe christophe.corden...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, And what about integration of Tapestry in other framework ? From my experience view, integrating technologies in Tapestry is fun and fast, and the one provided by Tapestry are really good and enough to do what a Web Application should do. !but when i want to do the inverse i am facing a problem with Tapestry public API. Getting the Tapestry registry is simple but calling services from the outside is not as easy. For exemple, currently i am trying to secure my application by using spring-security to centralize security concerns, and then create a RoleVoter to secure also Tapestry URLs. To achieve this, Spring allows me to access to the servlet context and then to Tapestry Registry, now we can imagine that analyzing the URL will be as easy as using the ComponentEventLinkEncoder service, but in real i had to create an instance of RequestImpl, retrieve others services, set the request into the RequestGlobals... service just to analyze the URL ! I can see where your frustration might come from in this respect. At many times during the development of Tapestry, we've had to make a choice: easy and automatic for the typical user, or easily extensible for the power-developer. That's a no-brainer: easy and automatic for the typical user is the way to go. In this particular case, it was all about making things work correctly from inside Tapestry; the idea that you would be analyzing a Tapestry URL when not in the middle of processing a Tapestry request (and therefore, deep into the pipeline that automatically sets up the RequestGlobals values) is just foreign to Tapestry. That is, to make that rare use-case easier for you, would complicate the code for most other users, making it that much harder to extend and override Tapestry for more typical use cases. In fact, where other people might write servlets, I would tend to contribute a new Dispatcher to the MasterDispatcher service to accomplish the same goal (in the rare case that existing Dispatchers and other Tapestry mechanisms could not fulfill the required role). I'm also a bit surprised at how eager people are to make use of cumbersome solutions like Spring Security to accomplish simple tasks such as protecting pages. The Spring Security logic is path-based, requiring an awkward mapping from paths to Tapestry pages. When I need to implement that kind of security, I define annotations that I can place on pages and provide a filter that checks for the annotation on the page ... and I've seen multiple clients do the same thing. Ideally there would be a single solution for this, but I've found that page security is just not a one-size-fits-all solution. In other words, jumping over backwards for integrations with technologies is often not the best approach. Yes, it would be nice to have a checkbox compatible with Spring Security but I'd rather talk about how easy it is to create your own custom extensions that work precisely as you need. We've had this discussion at Formos; it was often easier to create a totally custom solution in Tapestry than it was to take an off-the-shelf solution that did 80% of what was needed and customize it the last 20% of the way. Tapestry is so powerful and has everything to work standalone (see wrappers around servlet API, or PageTester, ...), but sometimes it's hard to exploit this great feature ... Best Regards, Christophe 2009/12/23 Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com While it's true that other frameworks (Grails, Wicket, Rails) have large numbers of integrations, if you talk to real developers you find out that the majority of those integrations are not actually usable for production work. All too often, they are orphaned, unsupported, incomplete, naive or coded against an earlier version of the core framework ... or some combination of all of those. I do a lot of training and consulting on Tapestry with a lot of groups and what I find is that one size does not fit all, even for simple things like user authentication/login. I'm quite happy to have a limited number of basic integrations that are documented, supported and tested. Would I like every application to just be a matter of mixing pre-built modules together? Yes. Do I think it is realistic, for ANY framework? No. On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote: Noe, I've been down this path before, regrettably. The ONLY thing to do it to ignore the trolls. On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Newham, Cameron cameron.new...@bl.uk wrote: I don't agree with the OP that the ServerSide discussion shows Tapestry has lost the battle - two posters state they don't want to see Tapestry mentioned. That's all there is. However, I can't agree with you Thiago. The old saying is if you say it enough times then people will believe it is true. If you are just going to stand by and let trolls
Re: About T5 integration modules
Hi, About pages protected access, I think that the tapestry5-portlet module will provide (through portal platform) implementations of much of the common functionality that any web-based application would require: role-based security (including authentication and authorization), user registration and administration, self resetting of user passwords. In the mean time, I'm using Chenillekit Access module. Best Regards, Marcus
