-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is what I'm thinking... :-D But I'm also thinking that it's a level above Tapestry to "pull it all together". There's a difference between "use this to build sites" and "use this to build/manage/deploy/update/generate" sites. I'd like Tapestry itself to continue to make the former easier/faster/better, but as an off-topic I'm going to see what I can put together as far as the latter - basically using Tapestry as its "back-end generator".
Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > Hm. Wouldn't it be neat if Tapestry had a runtime environment that > promoted the use of plugins to extend the available features. Sort of > a hive of plugins working together, each minding its own portion of > the application ... :-) > > On 4/26/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > lol - Example: I use Eclipse. It's not a "source code editor / syntax > highlighter / code completer", it's a framework that has the JDT - THAT > does those functions. It also doesn't integrate with SVN. Subclipse does > that. So I don't believe Tapestry should do what I'd like - I think > there should be a framework that uses Tapestry for what Tapestry does, > but also has more 'plugins'. If you've ever used Vignette's StoryServer > (or others out there), it's the same concept. > > "do it whenever, I don't care"... yeah - never heard that before. :-D > > Geoff Longman wrote: >>>> On 4/26/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> You know... I think (as much as I'd like to see this just 'built in') >>>> this is a lot like saying "I'd like my source code editor/syntax >>>> highlighter/code completer to have source code integration" - it doesn't >>>> belong. What you need is an "Eclipse/Idea/Pick your IDE" that integrates >>>> the two. >>>> >>>>> The above paragraph is in some English-like language that look >>>>> *exactly* like English but runs through my brain without computing >>>>> into anything at all ;-) >>>>> Probably the similar to the language my wife uses to mean "do it >>>>> yesterday or I will make your life a living hell" when she says "do it >>>>> whenever, I don't care." >>>>> What does "I'd like my source code editor/syntax >>>>> highlighter/code completer to have source code integration" mean? >>>>> Geoff >>>> >>>> Hmmm... Yeah... That would be an interesting endeavor. Time to work out >>>> something like this... Take that IDE to application-land. >>>> >>>> James Carman wrote: >>>>>>> It might be worth looking into OSCache for this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Brian K. Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:20 AM >>>>>>> To: Tapestry development >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 progress >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Works for me. Plenty of growing room for 4 left anyway, right Jesse? ;-) >>>>>>> I'm just hoping to get documentation (*ugh*) and tooling (Spindle) up to >>>>>>> speed before 5 hits. (feed the masses and all that :-)) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In speaking of performance... (I'm off in dream land here, I know... but >>>>>>> I like it there sometimes) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many moons ago, there was talk of a 'tool' /'utility' that would >>>>>>> basically spider a Tapestry app and get all the generated HTML resulting >>>>>>> in basically a statically generated site. This helps tremendously when >>>>>>> you're running behind a web server that's tuned to serve static content >>>>>>> - it's what they do and they do it pretty well with no overhead past >>>>>>> itself (meaning no java, no db, etc). I'd like to see if we can't add >>>>>>> some sort of 'cache' attribute to the HTML (somewhere) that would allow >>>>>>> Tapestry to perform this type of "wait, it says to cache it - i've >>>>>>> already generated it, I'll just grab that and use it" processing. This >>>>>>> would also allow Tapestry to build on first access but write out the >>>>>>> generated HTML so the next time a request comes in for it, the web >>>>>>> server would find it first (outside the mapping for Tapestry). Granted >>>>>>> this would only work for pages that were "cache=true" and had no dynamic >>>>>>> components inside it, but for a lot of sites that's enough (especially >>>>>>> outside a 'user' area). If there's a static form, submitting it would >>>>>>> pass back to Tapestry for processing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd see this as only improving performance if you run Tapestry behind >>>>>>> something like Apache. Granted, you'd get a lot of "that's not fair - >>>>>>> you're not comparing our framework to yours if you don't hit your >>>>>>> framework more than once when we have to hit ours every time" >>>>>>> comments... but hey ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My .02 >>>>>>> Brian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Howard Lewis Ship wrote: >>>>>>>>> The basic AOP infrastructure is coming along. I expect the rest to >>>>>>>>> ramp up pretty quickly once I get that in place, but we're still >>>>>>>>> talking months. Maybe a useable beta by year's end. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think I predicted a big performance boost for Tapestry 4 apps vs. >>>>>>>>> equivalent Tapestry 3 apps. I believe the difference between 4 and 5 >>>>>>>>> will be greater. In fact, I expect OGNL support to be an add on, and >>>>>>>>> the built-in code will be an improved version of tapestry-prop (from >>>>>>>>> Tapestry @ JavaForge). I want Tapestry to be extremely high >>>>>>>>> performance, as one of its differentiators from JSF and Rails. >>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) iD8DBQFET7RtaCoPKRow/gARAvcKAJ9oRrgSVknYyAq7V1k9kXvZSn69egCgzueh m8+Wpdk+ZGEbpdSTyThJpvo= =YJFI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
