Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Hi Rob or however you are! Nice to see you spicing up this list ;) Your comments are always very thoughtful so everybody on this list can feel how you from your deepest heart care about people on this list as well as the evolution of Tapestry. Thank you for your invaluable contribution! Reading your answer to Andys post one thing came to my mind and I really would appreciate you answering my question: Did you realize that Andy asked very concise questions? He didn't ask should I or should I not use Tapestry but in fact he was going well beyond the surface. If you'd the mental elasticity to surpass your innate denial of Tapestry and come up with concrete answers to concrete questions I would even like your posts more. Regards, Michael Rob Smeets schrieb: Hi Andy, Be wise and dig around the Internet to find answers to your questions and don't turn to this list since they won't offer you a non-biased answers. For a starter go to theserverside.com where recently a discussion was held on Tapestry. The link is: http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=48743 Personally, I won't advise you to go with Tapestry due to it's bad record on backward compatibility. Rob On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Andy Blower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I'm evaluating Tapestry (among others) for the web framework we'll use at my company for the next 5 years or so. We've used Struts 1 for the last 5-6 years and it's served us well, even if it was higher maintenance than was first apparent. I have spent over two days reading about Tapestry history and general thoughts about past and future which has proved rather distracting. I'm really not sure whether I should evaluate 4.1 or 5 because the documentation and intro/tutorial material isn't ready yet for 5 and I'm completely new to component oriented frameworks. If I evaluated 4.1, would that be valid for us still to go on to use 5? It's really hard to get a handle on the differences of two things you don't yet understand! I have three (more specific) questions: 1) What methods are known for implementing webpage templates in Tapestry (e.g. banner, nav, sidebar, content, footer) and is there one considered 'best practice'? 2) How easy is it to add custom AJAX interactions? I'm thinking of interactions like checking a checkbox to mark a search result, return success and visually change the appearance. 3) Is it practical to have base classes containing common functionality, which are extended by very terse page classes along with actual page templates or am I thinking about this wrong? With the only T5 examples being so trivial, it's really hard to get a bigger picture view at the moment, but I am very intrigued. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16368331.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Thanks for your concern Rob, but I'm pretty comfortable evaluating things myself and have already read that discussion. The backward compatibility history of Tapestry will certainly be taken into consideration. (that was the distraction I mentioned) Sometimes it's better to break backwards compatibility rather than keep sub-optimal design, and it's much better than being mostly backwards compatible except for a few details that trip people up unexpectedly. (voice of experience talking) To everyone else - thanks for your help and comments, hopefully I'll get some time to look into them early this week. Andy. Rob Smeets wrote: Hi Andy, Be wise and dig around the Internet to find answers to your questions and don't turn to this list since they won't offer you a non-biased answers. For a starter go to theserverside.com where recently a discussion was held on Tapestry. The link is: http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=48743 Personally, I won't advise you to go with Tapestry due to it's bad record on backward compatibility. Rob -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16395620.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Hi there, I'm evaluating Tapestry (among others) for the web framework we'll use at my company for the next 5 years or so. We've used Struts 1 for the last 5-6 years and it's served us well, even if it was higher maintenance than was first apparent. I have spent over two days reading about Tapestry history and general thoughts about past and future which has proved rather distracting. I'm really not sure whether I should evaluate 4.1 or 5 because the documentation and intro/tutorial material isn't ready yet for 5 and I'm completely new to component oriented frameworks. If I evaluated 4.1, would that be valid for us still to go on to use 5? It's really hard to get a handle on the differences of two things you don't yet understand! I have three (more specific) questions: 1) What methods are known for implementing webpage templates in Tapestry (e.g. banner, nav, sidebar, content, footer) and is there one considered 'best practice'? 2) How easy is it to add custom AJAX interactions? I'm thinking of interactions like checking a checkbox to mark a search result, return success and visually change the appearance. 3) Is it practical to have base classes containing common functionality, which are extended by very terse page classes along with actual page templates or am I thinking about this wrong? With the only T5 examples being so trivial, it's really hard to get a bigger picture view at the moment, but I am very intrigued. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16368331.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Andy, you should take a look at tapestry jumpstart by geoff callender: http://files.doublenegative.com.au/jumpstart/ I only wish there were a demo server of this somewhere because the webapp itself will show its template + class in the browser. -mike On Mar 29, 2008, at 5:44 AM, Andy Blower wrote: Hi there, I'm evaluating Tapestry (among others) for the web framework we'll use at my company for the next 5 years or so. We've used Struts 1 for the last 5-6 years and it's served us well, even if it was higher maintenance than was first apparent. I have spent over two days reading about Tapestry history and general thoughts about past and future which has proved rather distracting. I'm really not sure whether I should evaluate 4.1 or 5 because the documentation and intro/tutorial material isn't ready yet for 5 and I'm completely new to component oriented frameworks. If I evaluated 4.1, would that be valid for us still to go on to use 5? It's really hard to get a handle on the differences of two things you don't yet understand! I have three (more specific) questions: 1) What methods are known for implementing webpage templates in Tapestry (e.g. banner, nav, sidebar, content, footer) and is there one considered 'best practice'? 2) How easy is it to add custom AJAX interactions? I'm thinking of interactions like checking a checkbox to mark a search result, return success and visually change the appearance. 3) Is it practical to have base classes containing common functionality, which are extended by very terse page classes along with actual page templates or am I thinking about this wrong? With the only T5 examples being so trivial, it's really hard to get a bigger picture view at the moment, but I am very intrigued. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16368331.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 2:44 AM, Andy Blower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I'm evaluating Tapestry (among others) for the web framework we'll use at my company for the next 5 years or so. We've used Struts 1 for the last 5-6 years and it's served us well, even if it was higher maintenance than was first apparent. I have spent over two days reading about Tapestry history and general thoughts about past and future which has proved rather distracting. I'm really not sure whether I should evaluate 4.1 or 5 because the documentation and intro/tutorial material isn't ready yet for 5 and I'm completely new to component oriented frameworks. If I evaluated 4.1, would that be valid for us still to go on to use 5? It's really hard to get a handle on the differences of two things you don't yet understand! I have three (more specific) questions: 1) What methods are known for implementing webpage templates in Tapestry (e.g. banner, nav, sidebar, content, footer) and is there one considered 'best practice'? The layout pattern is the best way to approach this class of problems: http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-core/guide/layout.html These kinds of layout components can be very smart and highly adaptable via templates and other techniques. 2) How easy is it to add custom AJAX interactions? I'm thinking of interactions like checking a checkbox to mark a search result, return success and visually change the appearance. Very easy, because Tapestry's makes it very easy to create a URL that triggers an event within a specific component. The component can respond to the event via an event handler method, and can easily communicate a response back to the client by returning a stream, a JSON Object, or some rendered markup. 3) Is it practical to have base classes containing common functionality, which are extended by very terse page classes along with actual page templates or am I thinking about this wrong? Yes, and Tapestry even has some support for JDK Generics for this purpose. However, I would caution not to go overboard with base classes, when injection is *so* easy; Common behavior can be factored into IoC (Inversion of Control) services that can be injected directly into component fields. A relatively flat (1 - 2) level inheritance hiearchy, with common code in injectable services, is much easier to maintain. With the only T5 examples being so trivial, it's really hard to get a bigger picture view at the moment, but I am very intrigued. And I here you, but the community is stepping up; please check the T5 home page and wiki with links to prototype applications, tutorials and other examples. And some very useful component libraries. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16368331.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Other posts have handled your specifics well. Evaluate T5. I started active development on T4.0. I have since migrated a few of the smaller applications from T4 - T5 and I am doing all new work in T5. In the T4-T5 migrations, I found I was deleting lots of code and cleaning up my templates. Also, the hot reloading of changes is amazing. With the largest of my T4 applications it was getting painful to be doing restarts after simple fixes. It was great having the time to get coffee, but productivity suffered. T5 is just go-go-go. The one place where T4 was better than T5 (I found) was WYSIWYG templates. I think it was easier for shops where you had both designers and programmers. There were times where I would take off my coding hat and just work with HTML, CSS and a browser and focus on appearances. With T5, it's easier just to run your app and tweak on the fly. Jonathan -Original Message- From: Andy Blower [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 5:45 AM To: users@tapestry.apache.org Subject: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions Hi there, I'm evaluating Tapestry (among others) for the web framework we'll use at my company for the next 5 years or so. We've used Struts 1 for the last 5-6 years and it's served us well, even if it was higher maintenance than was first apparent. I have spent over two days reading about Tapestry history and general thoughts about past and future which has proved rather distracting. I'm really not sure whether I should evaluate 4.1 or 5 because the documentation and intro/tutorial material isn't ready yet for 5 and I'm completely new to component oriented frameworks. If I evaluated 4.1, would that be valid for us still to go on to use 5? It's really hard to get a handle on the differences of two things you don't yet understand! I have three (more specific) questions: 1) What methods are known for implementing webpage templates in Tapestry (e.g. banner, nav, sidebar, content, footer) and is there one considered 'best practice'? 2) How easy is it to add custom AJAX interactions? I'm thinking of interactions like checking a checkbox to mark a search result, return success and visually change the appearance. 3) Is it practical to have base classes containing common functionality, which are extended by very terse page classes along with actual page templates or am I thinking about this wrong? With the only T5 examples being so trivial, it's really hard to get a bigger picture view at the moment, but I am very intrigued. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry- evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16368331.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Hi Jonathan, Initially I use dreamweaver to design the page, and make it a point to use regular tags like: my Link , this will make it easier for me to go back to dreamweaver for page update, but later I found out that I started to write t:actionLinkmy link/t:actionLink and not coming back any more to dreamweaver, I fire up FireBug, change the layout in the fly, and then update the t5 template and try again, it works quite well with me, but this will not work well if the pages have to be maintained by a html designer, is this what you are doing too? thanks. Angelo Jonathan Barker wrote: HTML, CSS and a browser and focus on appearances. With T5, it's easier just to run your app and tweak on the fly. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16375682.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
I am actually using this syntax, so that I should get the best of both worlds. a t:type=actionLink .../a Angelo Chen wrote: Hi Jonathan, Initially I use dreamweaver to design the page, and make it a point to use regular tags like: my Link , this will make it easier for me to go back to dreamweaver for page update, but later I found out that I started to write t:actionLinkmy link/t:actionLink and not coming back any more to dreamweaver, I fire up FireBug, change the layout in the fly, and then update the t5 template and try again, it works quite well with me, but this will not work well if the pages have to be maintained by a html designer, is this what you are doing too? thanks. Angelo Jonathan Barker wrote: HTML, CSS and a browser and focus on appearances. With T5, it's easier just to run your app and tweak on the fly. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Hi Fernando, I think so, if you want to be wisiwig, use regular tags, but programmers turn to use the component tags for that as it is easier to read, so that's really a 'policy' issue, if it's a team work i think regular tags are better. Angelo Fernando Padilla wrote: I am actually using this syntax, so that I should get the best of both worlds. Angelo Chen wrote: Hi Jonathan, Initially I use dreamweaver to design the page, and make it a point to use regular tags like: my Link , this will make it easier for me to go back to dreamweaver for page update, but later I found out that I started to write t:actionLinkmy link/t:actionLink and not coming back any more to dreamweaver, I fire up FireBug, change the layout in the fly, and then update the t5 template and try again, it works quite well with me, but this will not work well if the pages have to be maintained by a html designer, is this what you are doing too? thanks. Angelo Jonathan Barker wrote: HTML, CSS and a browser and focus on appearances. With T5, it's easier just to run your app and tweak on the fly. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry-evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16376111.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions
Angelo, I find that there will usually be a page or two that I want to play with to get the look right for the whole app. I'm always using a Layout / Border component, so I like to repeat the Border design on those pages and then play with the CSS. With the new project design, my templates will be under src/main/resources/ca/itstrategic/client/app/pages and then CSS will be under src/main/webapp/css. I like the organization, but referring to that path for WYSIWYG and injecting it for runtime is a pain. And there doesn't seem to be anything as easy as $content$ and $remove$. I usually use t:type rather than the short form to keep some level of viewability. I don't usually have to pass off to a designer (Frankly, most of what I do doesn't have to be pretty. It has to be fast and rock-solid.) I am now doing more that needs to look good so I can see it being more of an issue in the future. I also see it being an issue for adoption in larger shops where there is a separation of roles. Jonathan -Original Message- From: Angelo Chen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 6:37 PM To: users@tapestry.apache.org Subject: RE: [T5] Tapestry evaluation + questions Hi Jonathan, Initially I use dreamweaver to design the page, and make it a point to use regular tags like: my Link , this will make it easier for me to go back to dreamweaver for page update, but later I found out that I started to write t:actionLinkmy link/t:actionLink and not coming back any more to dreamweaver, I fire up FireBug, change the layout in the fly, and then update the t5 template and try again, it works quite well with me, but this will not work well if the pages have to be maintained by a html designer, is this what you are doing too? thanks. Angelo Jonathan Barker wrote: HTML, CSS and a browser and focus on appearances. With T5, it's easier just to run your app and tweak on the fly. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-T5--Tapestry- evaluation-%2B-questions-tp16368331p16375682.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
