Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
A released product needs to achieve 'true' stability in the code base, especially with regards to internals, I imagine that keeping tapestry as an Alpha/Beta allows more flexibility to modify the internals without causing waves in the community. I always have had the feeing that production releases come with an unwritten rule that any significant changes that could break/depreciate existing applications are not appreciable, whereas with an Alpha/Beta there is carte blanche and no guarantees. If this kind of 'promise' can be implied then Tapestry 5 should be ready for release and clients can invest resources with some confidence, otherwise it's better to allow Tapestry to mature and gradually achieve this type of stability... after all you are still free to use it, that's my 2 cents. Peter Angelo Chen wrote: Hi Chris, Can't agree more. T5 is stable enough to be released. if I was hesitant to learn a unreleased T5 for my first web framework at beginning, how much more a businese putting their project development on it? the only reason I can think of is, maybe there is still some plans to change something in the framework? if not, then sooner released the better, just my 2 cents, A.C. Christian Gruber-4 wrote: I think this merely means that T5 should release sooner than later with a smaller functionality set, and release a 5.1 with the additional features. At this point, it's part perception, etc. But if the core is stable, then 5.0-RELEASE could be compared with JSF, Wicket, etc. on a feature-for-feature basis. It wouldn't have the additional burden of unreleased software. I mean it's at 5.0.5 right now, which in my mind IS released... Certainly my time to market even factoring in learning-curve has improved over JSF or Struts 2. Christian. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Thanks for the vote of support! I concur, I don't think of final release in terms of code quality, since I strive to keep code quality high at all times. It's mostly about missing features. Sure there's lots of fiddly little bits that need some work (many localization issues, trickiness with forms, file uploads and content encoding, that type of thing). And there's a couple of big gaps: Ajax features being the main one. But even with fiddling with naming and file extensions and other important details, I've been very happy with stability. I hope others are too. Glad you're having fun with Tapestry. On 10/26/07, Alexander Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to add that final release is a very subjective term. Indeed, as you may read in the success stories, we are in production since october 1st using Tapestry 5.0.6 and it runs fine. I may add that 5.0.6 is probably more stable than many frameworks which would claim to be final release. Now, if you are waiting for features to be added for a final release, that's another matter. We decided we could go without build in Ajax for the time being and we shall upgrade once the 5.0.7 (with Ajax as I understood?) will contain a stable iteration of Ajax. The benefits of being on the 5.x Tapestry versus 4.x are much more important than the inconveniences of being on a development branch with a few missing features. Alex Le 26 oct. 07 à 06:28, petros a écrit : Thanks for this Howard. Following from your reply I believe is reasonably safe to assume that the final release of T5 will be no later than March or April 2008. Thanks again for your prompt reply Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: Unfortunately, I'm going to only be working on Tapestry part time until Q1, when I finally (keep fingers crossed) will be working on Tapestry at least part of the time on salaried, not personal, time. Mentally, I'm deferring a number of things into the followon release, 5.1. When will thing finalize? Still a month or more out, into Q1 2008. Not Q4 2008 :-) On 10/25/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really need to know the realistic T5 final release. I don't mind if the answer is the end of 2008 but I need to have an answer. I still believe that T5 is the BEST framework out there, but in my case this is not the most important factor. The answer to my question above will assist me to manage the stakeholders of my projects. Howard, a prompt reply to this message will be greatly appreciated. Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13408649 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5- Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13420701 Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Alexander Lamb Founding Associate RODANOTECH Sàrl 4 ch. de la Tour de Champel 1206 Geneva Switzerland Tel: 022 347 77 37 Fax: 022 347 77 38 http://www.rodanotech.ch -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I would like to add that final release is a very subjective term. Indeed, as you may read in the success stories, we are in production since october 1st using Tapestry 5.0.6 and it runs fine. I may add that 5.0.6 is probably more stable than many frameworks which would claim to be final release. Now, if you are waiting for features to be added for a final release, that's another matter. We decided we could go without build in Ajax for the time being and we shall upgrade once the 5.0.7 (with Ajax as I understood?) will contain a stable iteration of Ajax. The benefits of being on the 5.x Tapestry versus 4.x are much more important than the inconveniences of being on a development branch with a few missing features. Alex Le 26 oct. 07 à 06:28, petros a écrit : Thanks for this Howard. Following from your reply I believe is reasonably safe to assume that the final release of T5 will be no later than March or April 2008. Thanks again for your prompt reply Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: Unfortunately, I'm going to only be working on Tapestry part time until Q1, when I finally (keep fingers crossed) will be working on Tapestry at least part of the time on salaried, not personal, time. Mentally, I'm deferring a number of things into the followon release, 5.1. When will thing finalize? Still a month or more out, into Q1 2008. Not Q4 2008 :-) On 10/25/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really need to know the realistic T5 final release. I don't mind if the answer is the end of 2008 but I need to have an answer. I still believe that T5 is the BEST framework out there, but in my case this is not the most important factor. The answer to my question above will assist me to manage the stakeholders of my projects. Howard, a prompt reply to this message will be greatly appreciated. Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13408649 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5- Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13420701 Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Alexander Lamb Founding Associate RODANOTECH Sàrl 4 ch. de la Tour de Champel 1206 Geneva Switzerland Tel: 022 347 77 37 Fax: 022 347 77 38 http://www.rodanotech.ch
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I really need to know the realistic T5 final release. I don't mind if the answer is the end of 2008 but I need to have an answer. I still believe that T5 is the BEST framework out there, but in my case this is not the most important factor. The answer to my question above will assist me to manage the stakeholders of my projects. Howard, a prompt reply to this message will be greatly appreciated. Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13408649 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Unfortunately, I'm going to only be working on Tapestry part time until Q1, when I finally (keep fingers crossed) will be working on Tapestry at least part of the time on salaried, not personal, time. Mentally, I'm deferring a number of things into the followon release, 5.1. When will thing finalize? Still a month or more out, into Q1 2008. Not Q4 2008 :-) On 10/25/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really need to know the realistic T5 final release. I don't mind if the answer is the end of 2008 but I need to have an answer. I still believe that T5 is the BEST framework out there, but in my case this is not the most important factor. The answer to my question above will assist me to manage the stakeholders of my projects. Howard, a prompt reply to this message will be greatly appreciated. Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13408649 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:35:15 -0200, Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately, I'm going to only be working on Tapestry part time until Q1, when I finally (keep fingers crossed) will be working on Tapestry at least part of the time on salaried, not personal, time. Mentally, I'm deferring a number of things into the followon release, 5.1. When will thing finalize? Still a month or more out, into Q1 2008. Not Q4 2008 :-) Calendar year of fiscal year? :) There are two things Americans say almost all the time that makes me, a Brazilian, confuses me at first: referring to time in seasons (specially because they're swapped here, under the Equator line) and fiscal years (in Brazil, there's no such thing. The fiscal year is the calendar year, period). -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Desenvolvedor, Instrutor e Consultor de Tecnologia Eteg Tecnologia da Informação Ltda. http://www.eteg.com.br - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Thanks for this Howard. Following from your reply I believe is reasonably safe to assume that the final release of T5 will be no later than March or April 2008. Thanks again for your prompt reply Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: Unfortunately, I'm going to only be working on Tapestry part time until Q1, when I finally (keep fingers crossed) will be working on Tapestry at least part of the time on salaried, not personal, time. Mentally, I'm deferring a number of things into the followon release, 5.1. When will thing finalize? Still a month or more out, into Q1 2008. Not Q4 2008 :-) On 10/25/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really need to know the realistic T5 final release. I don't mind if the answer is the end of 2008 but I need to have an answer. I still believe that T5 is the BEST framework out there, but in my case this is not the most important factor. The answer to my question above will assist me to manage the stakeholders of my projects. Howard, a prompt reply to this message will be greatly appreciated. Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13408649 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13420701 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Christian, kranga is right. You can't keep telling yourself it is okay to change the framework to the point that an entire rewrite is needed to existing code. Some upgrading is expected (and necessary), but Tapestry will die a quick death, no matter how good it is under the hood, if you slap devotees in the face again and again. Christian Gruber wrote: Egregious? That demands and answer and perhaps an apology. Firstly, try porting and app from Weblogic Portal 8 to Weblogic Portal 9. It has conversion tools, but it's not compatible without up-conversion. Upconversion doesn't count. Then think of eclipse and the plugins geared for such. As to appservers themselves, core platforms have a higher bar for backwards compatibility and always have than component frameworks. Databases are also externally compatible only because they conform to an API they didn't write themselves (SQL92, etc.). I'm not sure about MySQL, but many SQL databases that have native APIs are not API compatible between releases when using that native API. And try to move the files over between databases, and you have to do an export and an import, because you can't just install an upgrade and have everything work. As I said, upconversion doesn't count. We're talking about a component framework, which is highly finicky. If you update the major versions, it's not unreasonable that existing components won't work. I mean Howard could have spent a lot of effort making a bridge or translation system to maintain compatibility (which is often how total rewrites gain their backwards compatibility... see windows), but he didn't (clearly) think that was worth his time. Of course, it's open-source, so you could do it, if you wanted it badly enough. Oh, and blah blah blah fork blah blah. You know that part. Regardless of all of this, at least one major apache project has this policy too, and that's from 2 minutes on google.http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html. Major versions mean incompatible releases. That's (in my experience, except for platforms themselves) often the (non-marketing) meaning of major versions. A few other examples: http://www.jmock.org/versioning.html http://xstream.codehaus.org/versioning.html http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/BPFrameworks/Concepts/VersionInformation.html http://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering ... oh, and most unix libraries. While not absolutely true in all cases, it is most certainly true in many cases, and is not unreasonable. Now apologize for your imputation, sir, for you are substantially, demonstrably incorrect. Christian. P.S. Ok, I'm not really that offended, just irritated with how personal you just made it. I don't like being called out for simple observations from 15 years in software development. On 19-Oct-07, at 7:00 AM, kranga wrote: That is an incredible statement! There have been numerous discussions on this mailing list on the way T4 was made completely incompatible since it was going to incorporate the very best and then T5 was made even more incompatible to incorporate the latest. This has been a vexing issue with quite a few people and organizations who invested in T3/T4 based projects. By way of example, tell me how these products are not compatible within major releases: Websphere 4, 5, 6 WebLogic: 8, 9, 10 MySQL: 4, 5 Hibernate: 2, 3 There are some pieces that change and new features are introduced. But your don't have to do a major rewrite to use the newer version. As an example, if T5 were T4 + annotations, that would be a compatible release. But Howard has chosen to rewrite it from the ground up with no compatiblity concern. Well, thats his prerogative as this is open-source community driven development. If I want, I can take the T3 code base and establish my own framework. However, it also reflects on the popularly or lack of for Tapestry. This topic has been beaten to death and I don't wish to bring it up again. However, your point regarding versions was egregious. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:58 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap I'm not sure where incompatible releases comes in. No one releases 1.0 - 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically what the large version number change means - these are incompatible. That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation. Christian On 18-Oct-07, at 6:45 AM, kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:15:03 -0300, Peter Stavrinides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but Tapestry will die a quick death, no matter how good it is under the hood, if you slap devotees in the face again and again. Howard has stated very clearly that there will be no Tapestry 6 or, at least, that an eventual Tapestry 6 would be backwards compatible with Tapestry 5. Read the Howard's comments here: http://jroller.com/WarnerOnstine/entry/why_hasn_t_tapestry_been -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Desenvolvedor, Instrutor e Consultor de Tecnologia Eteg Tecnologia da Informação Ltda. http://www.eteg.com.br - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I am speaking from my experience (and based on others in the mailing list who have echoed a similar sentiment). It is very frustrating for an organization to decide to use a framework and then find it is legacy in 6 months. Such is software development (and open source) and developers and corporations take that into account when putting their resources in. This shows in the lack of Tapestry adoption. And btw native database apis don't change. Oracle for e.g. has a huge backward compatiblity legacy. There are changes in most software, but not a complete rewrite. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap Egregious? That demands and answer and perhaps an apology. Firstly, try porting and app from Weblogic Portal 8 to Weblogic Portal 9. It has conversion tools, but it's not compatible without up- conversion. Upconversion doesn't count. Then think of eclipse and the plugins geared for such. As to appservers themselves, core platforms have a higher bar for backwards compatibility and always have than component frameworks. Databases are also externally compatible only because they conform to an API they didn't write themselves (SQL92, etc.). I'm not sure about MySQL, but many SQL databases that have native APIs are not API compatible between releases when using that native API. And try to move the files over between databases, and you have to do an export and an import, because you can't just install an upgrade and have everything work. As I said, upconversion doesn't count. We're talking about a component framework, which is highly finicky. If you update the major versions, it's not unreasonable that existing components won't work. I mean Howard could have spent a lot of effort making a bridge or translation system to maintain compatibility (which is often how total rewrites gain their backwards compatibility... see windows), but he didn't (clearly) think that was worth his time. Of course, it's open-source, so you could do it, if you wanted it badly enough. Oh, and blah blah blah fork blah blah. You know that part. Regardless of all of this, at least one major apache project has this policy too, and that's from 2 minutes on google.http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html . Major versions mean incompatible releases. That's (in my experience, except for platforms themselves) often the (non-marketing) meaning of major versions. A few other examples: http://www.jmock.org/versioning.html http://xstream.codehaus.org/versioning.html http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/BPFrameworks/Concepts/VersionInformation.html http://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering ... oh, and most unix libraries. While not absolutely true in all cases, it is most certainly true in many cases, and is not unreasonable. Now apologize for your imputation, sir, for you are substantially, demonstrably incorrect. Christian. P.S. Ok, I'm not really that offended, just irritated with how personal you just made it. I don't like being called out for simple observations from 15 years in software development. On 19-Oct-07, at 7:00 AM, kranga wrote: That is an incredible statement! There have been numerous discussions on this mailing list on the way T4 was made completely incompatible since it was going to incorporate the very best and then T5 was made even more incompatible to incorporate the latest. This has been a vexing issue with quite a few people and organizations who invested in T3/T4 based projects. By way of example, tell me how these products are not compatible within major releases: Websphere 4, 5, 6 WebLogic: 8, 9, 10 MySQL: 4, 5 Hibernate: 2, 3 There are some pieces that change and new features are introduced. But your don't have to do a major rewrite to use the newer version. As an example, if T5 were T4 + annotations, that would be a compatible release. But Howard has chosen to rewrite it from the ground up with no compatiblity concern. Well, thats his prerogative as this is open-source community driven development. If I want, I can take the T3 code base and establish my own framework. However, it also reflects on the popularly or lack of for Tapestry. This topic has been beaten to death and I don't wish to bring it up again. However, your point regarding versions was egregious. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:58 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap I'm not sure where incompatible releases comes in. No one releases 1.0 - 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically what the large version number change means - these are incompatible. That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation. Christian
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I didn't implicate you as stupid. You wouldn't be using Tapestry if you were stupid. I was commenting on you summarily dismissing the concerns of quite a few Tapestry users about the lack of version compatiblity and your implying that this was the industry norm. Look, Howard has carte blanche on what he wants to do or not do with Tapestry. He states that T5 is laying the foundation for future compatiblity. So be it. All I can say is that in a few years when there is the next new thing out there and T5 cannot support it, he may yet again abandon backwards compatiblity. If he does, again, he has carte blanche. But, you cannot claim that the lack of backward compatiblity is a non-issue. That is a slap in the face of corporations and consultants like me who pushed to get T3/T4 adopted and now look not so good because the corporation is faced with finding developers who can code to an outdated framework and where the upgrade path is steep. But that is open source and life. Just don't call it normal business practice in the marketplace. I didn't and never meant to insult anyone personally. No ad hominim attacks .. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 11:32 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap Ok, whatever. I give in. I'll go and use T4 and whine at Howard now. Oh wait, no I won't. I'll work on T5 and try to encourage it into as re-usable, and less brittle and change-vulnerable a form as I can, so that there is more likelihood of upgradability. (Howard's doing quite well about that already) Honestly, I wouldn't be so hostile at the moment if Kranga hadn't dropped the implication that I was stupid for merely observing something about version numbers. Just follow the links. I'm not saying anyone's wrong for saying that they want compatibility. I'm just saying (and it was all I was saying) that often (and provably often - see the links) major version numbers indicate incompatibility. That's not my opinion - that's an observation. I wasn't saying it was right, or better. I'm saying it's fair of the author to do what other software has clearly done before him, and Howard had the decency to make a major version bump to indicate that it's a new platform. I suppose he could have called it TapestryNG or something. Anyway, I'm out of this conversation. When people are comparing opinion with observed (and referenced) facts and giving me grief for it, they should try editing Wikipedia more. There at least that kind of thing isn't tolerated. Christian. On 23-Oct-07, at 9:15 AM, Peter Stavrinides wrote: Christian, kranga is right. You can't keep telling yourself it is okay to change the framework to the point that an entire rewrite is needed to existing code. Some upgrading is expected (and necessary), but Tapestry will die a quick death, no matter how good it is under the hood, if you slap devotees in the face again and again. - 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I am apparently a bit touchy this week, Kranga, et al. Please forgive. I also wasn't stating that lack of compatibility was an industry norm. I was saying, merely, that often (and demonstrably) a major version number implies a lack of complete backwards compatibility. That was all. Just that it wasn't crazy to be unsurprised by lack of compatibility between components in v3.x, v4.x, and v5.x. However wrong or unreasonable that might be, it is still explicit in the version policies I cited earlier. But we can all be glad that Howard and co. are working on making things such that future releases can rely on V5 apis. I'm normally not this irritable. Again, I apologize. Christian. On 23-Oct-07, at 6:31 PM, kranga wrote: I didn't implicate you as stupid. You wouldn't be using Tapestry if you were stupid. I was commenting on you summarily dismissing the concerns of quite a few Tapestry users about the lack of version compatiblity and your implying that this was the industry norm. Look, Howard has carte blanche on what he wants to do or not do with Tapestry. He states that T5 is laying the foundation for future compatiblity. So be it. All I can say is that in a few years when there is the next new thing out there and T5 cannot support it, he may yet again abandon backwards compatiblity. If he does, again, he has carte blanche. But, you cannot claim that the lack of backward compatiblity is a non-issue. That is a slap in the face of corporations and consultants like me who pushed to get T3/T4 adopted and now look not so good because the corporation is faced with finding developers who can code to an outdated framework and where the upgrade path is steep. But that is open source and life. Just don't call it normal business practice in the marketplace. I didn't and never meant to insult anyone personally. No ad hominim attacks .. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
On 10/23/07, Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me repeat ... I have seven years of experience (in Tapestry) on how NOT to be backwards compatible. T5 is all about ensuring future backwards compatibility without compromising the ability to enhance the framework going forward. I am not familiar with T3/T4 - only T5 - but if one builds a framework to eliminate future incompatibilities would not it be possible to make a backward compatibility as well? I guess this would be a good test case for the functionality you are developing. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
That is an incredible statement! There have been numerous discussions on this mailing list on the way T4 was made completely incompatible since it was going to incorporate the very best and then T5 was made even more incompatible to incorporate the latest. This has been a vexing issue with quite a few people and organizations who invested in T3/T4 based projects. By way of example, tell me how these products are not compatible within major releases: Websphere 4, 5, 6 WebLogic: 8, 9, 10 MySQL: 4, 5 Hibernate: 2, 3 There are some pieces that change and new features are introduced. But your don't have to do a major rewrite to use the newer version. As an example, if T5 were T4 + annotations, that would be a compatible release. But Howard has chosen to rewrite it from the ground up with no compatiblity concern. Well, thats his prerogative as this is open-source community driven development. If I want, I can take the T3 code base and establish my own framework. However, it also reflects on the popularly or lack of for Tapestry. This topic has been beaten to death and I don't wish to bring it up again. However, your point regarding versions was egregious. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:58 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap I'm not sure where incompatible releases comes in. No one releases 1.0 - 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically what the large version number change means - these are incompatible. That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation. Christian On 18-Oct-07, at 6:45 AM, kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So the competitive advantage is not clear cut. - Original Message - From: Alex Shneyderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - 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] - 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Egregious? That demands and answer and perhaps an apology. Firstly, try porting and app from Weblogic Portal 8 to Weblogic Portal 9. It has conversion tools, but it's not compatible without up- conversion. Upconversion doesn't count. Then think of eclipse and the plugins geared for such. As to appservers themselves, core platforms have a higher bar for backwards compatibility and always have than component frameworks. Databases are also externally compatible only because they conform to an API they didn't write themselves (SQL92, etc.). I'm not sure about MySQL, but many SQL databases that have native APIs are not API compatible between releases when using that native API. And try to move the files over between databases, and you have to do an export and an import, because you can't just install an upgrade and have everything work. As I said, upconversion doesn't count. We're talking about a component framework, which is highly finicky. If you update the major versions, it's not unreasonable that existing components won't work. I mean Howard could have spent a lot of effort making a bridge or translation system to maintain compatibility (which is often how total rewrites gain their backwards compatibility... see windows), but he didn't (clearly) think that was worth his time. Of course, it's open-source, so you could do it, if you wanted it badly enough. Oh, and blah blah blah fork blah blah. You know that part. Regardless of all of this, at least one major apache project has this policy too, and that's from 2 minutes on google.http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html . Major versions mean incompatible releases. That's (in my experience, except for platforms themselves) often the (non-marketing) meaning of major versions. A few other examples: http://www.jmock.org/versioning.html http://xstream.codehaus.org/versioning.html http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/BPFrameworks/Concepts/VersionInformation.html http://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering ... oh, and most unix libraries. While not absolutely true in all cases, it is most certainly true in many cases, and is not unreasonable. Now apologize for your imputation, sir, for you are substantially, demonstrably incorrect. Christian. P.S. Ok, I'm not really that offended, just irritated with how personal you just made it. I don't like being called out for simple observations from 15 years in software development. On 19-Oct-07, at 7:00 AM, kranga wrote: That is an incredible statement! There have been numerous discussions on this mailing list on the way T4 was made completely incompatible since it was going to incorporate the very best and then T5 was made even more incompatible to incorporate the latest. This has been a vexing issue with quite a few people and organizations who invested in T3/T4 based projects. By way of example, tell me how these products are not compatible within major releases: Websphere 4, 5, 6 WebLogic: 8, 9, 10 MySQL: 4, 5 Hibernate: 2, 3 There are some pieces that change and new features are introduced. But your don't have to do a major rewrite to use the newer version. As an example, if T5 were T4 + annotations, that would be a compatible release. But Howard has chosen to rewrite it from the ground up with no compatiblity concern. Well, thats his prerogative as this is open-source community driven development. If I want, I can take the T3 code base and establish my own framework. However, it also reflects on the popularly or lack of for Tapestry. This topic has been beaten to death and I don't wish to bring it up again. However, your point regarding versions was egregious. - Original Message - From: Christian Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:58 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap I'm not sure where incompatible releases comes in. No one releases 1.0 - 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically what the large version number change means - these are incompatible. That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation. Christian On 18-Oct-07, at 6:45 AM, kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So the competitive advantage is not clear cut. - Original Message - From: Alex Shneyderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I think Kranga is spot on. As a software engineer, my personal opinion is, that from a technical point of view Tapestry 5 is the best framework out there. However, going to client sites aiming to convince the stakeholders to adopt T5 is extremely difficult because they have absolutely no technical knowledge. Alex is right that the core of Tapestry 5 is quite stable and we can still fix Tapestry 5 bugs ourselves. However, putting such an argument in front of a Chief Technology Officer or a Chief Architect begs for the following response. I do not have the budget, time or interest to develop another web framework. I want to use an existing one to implement my business requirements ASAP and with a minimum budget Petros kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So the competitive advantage is not clear cut. - Original Message - From: Alex Shneyderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - 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] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13273517 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Yes I Michael, I know how this sounds but is a bit more complicated than that. Let me just say that I was hoping for the final T5 release to be at the end of this month so it can be ready for us by June 2008. That would have been good enough since I do agree T5 is the best framework I have worked with. This is why an update on the T5 roadmap is important for us. Petros Michael Kleen wrote: You seriously recommending a framework in a alpha status for a multi-million dollar project ? Don't get me wrong, i like tapestry and i'am using version 4.1 in 2 projects, but i would never use alphas/betas framework without good documentation/books in production. michael petros wrote: I am currently consulting a company that is starting a multi-million J2EE project and it appears that I am loosing the battle of convincing them to choose T5 over JSF. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13273520 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I'm not sure where incompatible releases comes in. No one releases 1.0 - 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically what the large version number change means - these are incompatible. That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation. Christian On 18-Oct-07, at 6:45 AM, kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So the competitive advantage is not clear cut. - Original Message - From: Alex Shneyderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - 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] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I think this merely means that T5 should release sooner than later with a smaller functionality set, and release a 5.1 with the additional features. At this point, it's part perception, etc. But if the core is stable, then 5.0-RELEASE could be compared with JSF, Wicket, etc. on a feature-for-feature basis. It wouldn't have the additional burden of unreleased software. I mean it's at 5.0.5 right now, which in my mind IS released... Certainly my time to market even factoring in learning-curve has improved over JSF or Struts 2. Christian. On 18-Oct-07, at 9:34 AM, petros wrote: I think Kranga is spot on. As a software engineer, my personal opinion is, that from a technical point of view Tapestry 5 is the best framework out there. However, going to client sites aiming to convince the stakeholders to adopt T5 is extremely difficult because they have absolutely no technical knowledge. Alex is right that the core of Tapestry 5 is quite stable and we can still fix Tapestry 5 bugs ourselves. However, putting such an argument in front of a Chief Technology Officer or a Chief Architect begs for the following response. I do not have the budget, time or interest to develop another web framework. I want to use an existing one to implement my business requirements ASAP and with a minimum budget Petros kranga wrote: The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically, but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So the competitive advantage is not clear cut. - Original Message - From: Alex Shneyderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be answering: Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to answer how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs that might exist and you will find during the project's development. If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the best choice to make from what's available out there :-) Alex. - 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] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13273517 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Hi Chris, Can't agree more. T5 is stable enough to be released. if I was hesitant to learn a unreleased T5 for my first web framework at beginning, how much more a businese putting their project development on it? the only reason I can think of is, maybe there is still some plans to change something in the framework? if not, then sooner released the better, just my 2 cents, A.C. Christian Gruber-4 wrote: I think this merely means that T5 should release sooner than later with a smaller functionality set, and release a 5.1 with the additional features. At this point, it's part perception, etc. But if the core is stable, then 5.0-RELEASE could be compared with JSF, Wicket, etc. on a feature-for-feature basis. It wouldn't have the additional burden of unreleased software. I mean it's at 5.0.5 right now, which in my mind IS released... Certainly my time to market even factoring in learning-curve has improved over JSF or Struts 2. Christian. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13277462 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Is it now possible to get a realistic date regarding the final release of T5. I do understand the commitment to paying projects have a priority but the last year I have been facing two main arguments that make my work as a consultant that aims to encourage clients to work with Tapestry very hard. 1. Tapestry is not backwards compatible (I have been pointing out that this problem is solved with T5 with the final release due this fall). 2. Tapestry is an one man show. The reply to my original question only enforces this argument. I am currently consulting a company that is starting a multi-million J2EE project and it appears that I am loosing the battle of convincing them to choose T5 over JSF. The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow Does anyone have any arguments that I can use to address the points raised above to prove that T5 should be chosen over JSF. Thanks, Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a13253260 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow Yes, please don't do that. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
2. Tapestry is an one man show. .. Actually, this is one advantage of Tapestry: guaranteed quality. On 10/17/07, Daniel Jue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow Yes, please don't do that. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
You seriously recommending a framework in a alpha status for a multi-million dollar project ? Don't get me wrong, i like tapestry and i'am using version 4.1 in 2 projects, but i would never use alphas/betas framework without good documentation/books in production. michael petros wrote: I am currently consulting a company that is starting a multi-million J2EE project and it appears that I am loosing the battle of convincing them to choose T5 over JSF. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I am still on 3.03, not even 3.04 for one of my projects. When Tapestry 5 gets where it is going, then maybe we will upgrade. I think the one thing that nobody is saying is that each version of Tapestry is in production use. So, there are 3.0x in production and 4.x in production. T5 will eventually be there and if you want to impact that and remove some of the risk, have your company spend some of that multi-millions on T5 either by paying Howard or by devoting you or another resource to the project. Or have them do it on JSF and move on with their project. I currently have three different projects on two different versions of Tapestry. We also have another being done with JSP's... Mark J. Stang Software Engineer office: +1 303.468.2900 Ping Identity -Original Message- From: Michael Kleen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 10/17/2007 9:24 AM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap You seriously recommending a framework in a alpha status for a multi-million dollar project ? Don't get me wrong, i like tapestry and i'am using version 4.1 in 2 projects, but i would never use alphas/betas framework without good documentation/books in production. michael petros wrote: I am currently consulting a company that is starting a multi-million J2EE project and it appears that I am loosing the battle of convincing them to choose T5 over JSF. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Hi, from the dev-list i've seen that Daniel Gredler and Dan Adams are 2 more quite active T5 committers. petros wrote: Is it now possible to get a realistic date regarding the final release of T5. I do understand the commitment to paying projects have a priority but the last year I have been facing two main arguments that make my work as a consultant that aims to encourage clients to work with Tapestry very hard. 1. Tapestry is not backwards compatible (I have been pointing out that this problem is solved with T5 with the final release due this fall). 2. Tapestry is an one man show. The reply to my original question only enforces this argument. I am currently consulting a company that is starting a multi-million J2EE project and it appears that I am loosing the battle of convincing them to choose T5 over JSF. The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow Does anyone have any arguments that I can use to address the points raised above to prove that T5 should be chosen over JSF. Thanks, Petros Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind -- Andreas Andreou - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://andyhot.di.uoa.gr Tapestry / Tacos developer Open Source / JEE Consulting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Actually, this is one advantage of Tapestry: guaranteed quality. That flies in the face of the philosophy of open source ... - Original Message - From: Yunhua Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:09 AM Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap 2. Tapestry is an one man show. .. Actually, this is one advantage of Tapestry: guaranteed quality. On 10/17/07, Daniel Jue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus tomorrow Yes, please don't do that. - 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: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
-Original Message- From: kranga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:29 PM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap Actually, this is one advantage of Tapestry: guaranteed quality. That flies in the face of the philosophy of open source ... Funny, I always thought the philosophy of open source was the sharing of knowledge. I fail to see how that has any bearing on whether that knowledge comes from one person or thousands. Jean-Philippe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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 Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50 Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind
Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
Is there any other developer working on T5 yet? Is there anything we can do to help? (we're working on using T5 for facebook production app, so we can devote time to helping). (I would like to see the TAPESTRY-1600 in there. :) Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I'll have a better idea about the roadmap at the end of this week. I've been working for a new consulting company, and the Big Project is not a web app (it's in Swing). This has slowed down progress on Tapestry 5, alas. On 9/13/07, petros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tapestry 5 website says that the final release of T5 is fall 2007. Is this still realistic ? If not can you please provide a realistic date ? Petros -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tapestry-5-Roadmap-tf4439437.html#a12666499 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]
