First, I vote +1 (non-binding) Second, I've followed this thread, and I speak only for myself and how I do things. I've held of upgrading to T4 because there's been no final release. The most important for me is that most major bugs get fixed before I adapt so that the work I do is done based on a stable product. That's the path to stability for my own work. When it comes to the validation framework lacking in documentation I don't really mind as long as there are some examples and code that I can look at. And because T4 is an open source project I can read all the source I want. IF the product would've been a commercial one the matter would be quite different...
If the validation docs are lacking I suggest that instead of complaining about it, try to write some. The whole idea with open source development is that you SHARE. If everybody would share a teeny bit of their time the whole process of releasing new versions would be much quicker. And if you don't have time, or don't want to contribute, stop complaning. And last, I've used T3 since it came out, and I must say that I'm still extremely glad that I switched from traditional JSP/servlet programming to Tapestry. Howard, you've really, really made a tremendous framework. And T4 is even better... I get goose bumps just thinking about it :) Regards, Niklas -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 12 december 2005 22:12 Till: Tapestry development Ämne: Re: [VOTE] 4.0 final release Jeff - no offense intended. My point is that open source is, especially at ASF, about "scratching itches". Tapestry has some of the best documentation of any open source framework out there, along with a complete running example application or two. Howard himself has done a fantastic job at keeping the documentation at that level. Most committers for open source projects simply don't have that itch to scratch and are not as keen to know what general users would need in terms of documentation. It is helpful if the community chips in for this kind of thing. I'm in the "ship early, and often" category. Documentation can evolve, as well as the code itself. Tap4 needs a final release to start getting adopted more pervasively. I wouldn't want to hold up a release for some missing documentation. Many of the folks that would grab it right away are already familiar with Tap3, I suspect. Erik On Dec 12, 2005, at 11:52 AM, Jeff Lubetkin wrote: > You're kidding, right? Howard asked for a vote, I voted. > > I like the idea of open source, and I try to contribute to the > community by answering questions on the lists, filing bugs, and the > like, but I do have a job with a startup, three small children, a > World of Warcraft addiction to feed, etc. Taking on the documentation > of a major subsystem that I didn't build strikes me as above and > beyond the call of duty. > > In any case, it doesn't change the fact that I don't think Tapestry > should go final with the docs in this condition, independent of the > discussion of who should write those docs. > > jeff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 5:24 AM > To: Tapestry development > Subject: Re: [VOTE] 4.0 final release > > > On Dec 11, 2005, at 2:00 PM, Jeff Lubetkin wrote: > >> The lack of decent documentation of the new (and very cool) >> validation system in either the TextField component doc or user guide >> makes Tapestry look unprofessional and incomplete. Rather than >> having docs to point my developers to, I have to hold a little >> validation class every time someone wants to use it. I've been able >> to excuse this by saying "well, it's just beta, I'm sure they'll >> document it before the final release". >> >> While I agree that the code is ready, I'm registering a (non- >> binding, of course) protest vote against calling T4 "final" until >> this documentation issue is fixed. > > Jeff - this is a classic, and often annoying, response.... > > How about rather than holding an internal validation class, you > > write up the details as patches to Tapestry's documentation and submit > them? Then next time your developers need documentation, you can say > RTM that you helped write. :) > > Erik > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
