There is already a trails:ObjectForm component that is not tied to Spring or Hibernate. It gets passed a Descriptor object as a parameter which represents information about a POJO.
How about we avoid writing this yet again... ;) --- "Brian K. Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi wrote: > > Jesse, those where 3 ideas, not 2 :P. > > But anyway... > > > > 1) As far as I understood, this translator stuff > is to make Tapestry > > more autobinding capable. Since most of my forms > deal with "foo.bar" > > expressions (some object and a property inside of > that object), as long > > as autowiring supports that, I'm happy. > > 2) This is for the performance concerned guys ;). > Needed, though. > > > > 3) > > > Yet-another-Hibernate-Tapestry-Integration-Project? > Really, why don't > > people just use Spring? Unless someone comes up > with a Seam equivalent > > for Tapestry, I don't understand exactly what's > the purpose of this. > > > > That said, I do have some > Hibernate-Spring-Tapestry stuff I could > > eventually contribute, dealing with long sessions > (which are needed for > > *everything* in Hibernate.... what a waste of > resources..). > > > > My 2 desired things: > > 4) A janitorial project / section / component / > whatever. Yeah, I know > > it's not as sexy. But really... it's needed. > It's the "what's needed" from a user's point of view > that interests me. > I don't need pretty. I just need fewer questions to > be answered. :-) > (not that I don't want pretty, just that Tapestry > already does so much > that either a) isn't quite there for "less than > edge" cases or b) isn't > documented - or not as easy to find. [more an > agreement on #4 than a > documentation push there :-)] > > > 5) DHTML subproject... not only Ajax but also > simpler effects, including > > validation, enabling / disabling components, etc.. > I wrote about this > > some time ago. > > > > In any case, I'm getting worried that the focus is > losing in this > > development. I wonder, why don't we focus all > resources into removing > > the rewind cycle, or eliminating abstract classes, > or some of the other > > stuff Howard said he would like for Tap 4.1 / 5 ? > There are quite a few things that were talked about > - first for 3.1/4.0, > now 4.1/5.0 that get left behind with evolution. I'd > like to propose > (yeah, I did this before :-)) a roadmap with issues > assigned to achieve > the goals set out in it. There will be bugs, but for > X.0/X.1/X.2/etc > releases there should be some sort of "written in > jello" features. If it > takes brain dumping all itemized features, then > splitting them off into > releases, maybe we can continue to get those done > while new things are > being dreamed up. > > > > Or else we'll end up with a 3 year development > cycle... > > > NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) > > iD8DBQFEMslhaCoPKRow/gARAnOaAKDQGmxNcs5oQ51iphMEpkR95slD7wCeNDSc > 9iUG/2hwTpgMBLm1erE+Y64= > =g+Ua > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
