RE: Migration experiences (3.0 - 4.1? )
I've been migrating from 3.1 to 4.1, and yes, it's been pretty painful. The documentation found at http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/ and http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/upgrade.html is woefully incomplete unless your application is very simple. I've been keeping notes on everything I've discovered in my migration efforts, so maybe I could post them on the Tapestry Wiki when I'm done. Robert J. Walker Marilen Corciovei wrote: Hello, I have been working on a Tapestry based product started almost 2.5 years ago. It's a CMS based product targeted at french cityhalls sites (as described here: http://www.nemesisit.ro/clients/case-study ). This was build on 3.0 beta and then on 3.0.3. Now it's in production from more than one year and they want to begin a new cycle of developments. I want to try to impose a migration on the new versions. As this does not seem always usefull for non-technical people I am trying first to estimate the efforts implied. I have also worked on 4.0 based projects and there are some differences. 4.1 seems to finally remove all the deprecated stuff in 4.0. What are your migration experiences from 3.0 to 4.0 or 4.1. Is there a migration directly to 4.1 much too complicated, has anyone did that? The project was quite large and on several ocasions I had to overwrite components or use some tricks. One aspect which I want to keep in mind is that I did a migration from 2.3 to 3.0 in the past on an equaly large project and I ended up with some very non-uniform code. Even if the old .page or .jwc component definitions still worked I had no reason not to use the @Component in template definitions so the pages are quite strange to look on. It's rather obvious where all the new code is. So, I would like to avoid having this diversity once again. Thank you, Len www.len.ro - 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: Migration experiences (3.0 - 4.1?)
I migrated 2 sites from 3.x to 4.0.x. I just put in the new libraries and fixed everything that did not compile. For the most part the 3.x html and page files will work. Both took a couple of days to get a site that mostly worked. The biggest problems were things like PDF pages, all the plain HTML stuff was pretty easy. But as you say, you end up the something odd after this. On one project I just put up with the fact that it's an in transition project. Anything new I do the 4.x way. When I have to mess with old code I update things. On the other project I took the opportunity to clean things up and started over. I needed to make some schema changes, I wrote a bunch of hivemind services and pretty much rewrote the entire site. That took about 6 weeks but the new site is better, has test cases and is much easier to work on now. I would try and covert the site, get some experience with 4 and when the time is right rework the site to take advantage of the 4.x features Barry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Migration experiences (3.0 - 4.1?)
Hello, I have been working on a Tapestry based product started almost 2.5 years ago. It's a CMS based product targeted at french cityhalls sites (as described here: http://www.nemesisit.ro/clients/case-study ). This was build on 3.0 beta and then on 3.0.3. Now it's in production from more than one year and they want to begin a new cycle of developments. I want to try to impose a migration on the new versions. As this does not seem always usefull for non-technical people I am trying first to estimate the efforts implied. I have also worked on 4.0 based projects and there are some differences. 4.1 seems to finally remove all the deprecated stuff in 4.0. What are your migration experiences from 3.0 to 4.0 or 4.1. Is there a migration directly to 4.1 much too complicated, has anyone did that? The project was quite large and on several ocasions I had to overwrite components or use some tricks. One aspect which I want to keep in mind is that I did a migration from 2.3 to 3.0 in the past on an equaly large project and I ended up with some very non-uniform code. Even if the old .page or .jwc component definitions still worked I had no reason not to use the @Component in template definitions so the pages are quite strange to look on. It's rather obvious where all the new code is. So, I would like to avoid having this diversity once again. Thank you, Len www.len.ro
