Seems like this thread has gone beyond "lively debate". Marc, just how much web application experience do you have? The folks on this list are making their livings doing it, have done many apps in many environments, and the majority of them are using Tapestry exclusively now.
They are an expert body, not just in terms of Tapestry, but in terms of Java web application development. In fact, while I've been writing frameworks and demos, they've been doing real apps, and Tapestry has evolved greatly based on community feedback. So, of course, they are going to take offence when someone comes in and calls them obstinate idiots. I maintain, and they maintain, that the important issues that Tapestry is built around manifest themselves rather sooner than you state. That is the consensus of the community. I think you have the capability to make some valid points, but you are lacking in politeness and coherence. For example, you keep shouting Defaults! Defaults! Defaults! but the only actual improvement you've mentioned simply moves component specification details into the HTML template. That's a half-assed solution to what is widely percieved as a non- problem ... you just aren't using the right tools. The framework, rightly, distinguishes between behavior and presentation and chooses to seperate those details into two seperate files (which turns out to be very convienient for tool writers). Two emacs windows or one Spindle window, the information is the same. In case you haven't noticed, one of us (me) has been looking for compromise ground (the concept of anonymous components, floated in an earlier e-mail). If you have valid points to make, make them. Give examples. You're the Phd, you should know how to defend yourself verbally. Just don't expect your every whim to be implemented. And everyone else ... Tapestry does need bigger exposure, either through JBoss or Jakarta or both. Marc is out there, big brass balls and all, living the open- source life, taking on BEA, the whole works, and I respect him for that. So I don't buy into the "buzz- off" line of thinking. Throughout my career, my apps and frameworks have benefitted from strong opposition, forcing me in new directions --- I'm just used to, and expect, polite and thoughtful discourse, not rants. And has Marc struck a nerve? Is Tapestry just too difficult for newbies? And if so, will better docs help, or do we need to shift directions? There are newbies in the list, they need to weigh in. How long is the lag before you feel effective in Tapestry? It isn't enough that Tapestry be better than Struts, Tea, Turbine, JPublish, Barracuda and the rest ... it should just be GREAT. Marc is stumblingly trying to state that Tapestry can't be the Ultimate Web Application Framework unless it is easy for new users to adopt, and he has a definate point. On the other hand, he's stuck in the Lone Wolf developer mold, hasn't had the "joy" of working on big projects with separate creative teams, which is where Tapestry (and the split between template and specification) really shines. And we can continue to be polite, even if he can't. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tapestry.sf.net > > I'm starting to get reallly pissed off by this thread and, sorry to say > so, your ignorance of the bigger picture. > > marc fleury wrote: > > .. > > decisions" make it look like an exclusive OR. Frankly for most the > > cases I talk about , declaring my template with title and what not, is > > much easier in a jsp like environment and greatly speeds up development. > > So use JSP or Struts. Have a blast. > > > You want to do the professional thing, and knock yourself out with all > > No, we _need_ to do 'the professional thing', simply because we want to go > places where JSP and the rest of the fucked up Java web 'framework' > travesty cannot take us. It's bad enough that Sun has managed to pervert > the software world with Java and their useless J2EE dog and pony show. > Tapestry is about being _different_. Better _necessarily_ means different. > > > the files "to enforce type safety and bla bla bla", you can. Is it > > useful? I will take your word, but we can have both. > > How do you know? I take it you've been working in web app development for > several years with different teams? > > > The API is there? great! PLEASE do it. IF "spindle" is like WOF/GUI and > > generates the mumbo-jumbo files, that is great. Where can I get that > > Spindle is a plugin for the eclipse IDE and can be found on SF. It's not > even close to WO's WOBuilder, but that's irrelevant. Btw, you'd be > extremely unhappy about the way the WOBuilder works since it gives you > _even less_ stuff to mess up in your template. How's that for a surprise? > > > everyone? hell no, will it send most newbies back to WOF and Struts? > > hell yes. You guys argue that the generic framework is the most > > err, no. If there's one thing that people complain about WO it's that it > has a pretty steep learning curve in a _completely different league_ than > Struts. Personally I couldn't care less about how many people are 'put > off' because they can't code their way out of their wet pants and rather > want to play low end fiddle. I need a high end tool and its relevance for > solving high end problems is completely unrelated to the number of people > who don't understand it. > > > powerful, it is a dull point and I don't care, the framework is > > fiendlishly un-friendly to newbies and jsp coders. Does that mean you > > should do away with it? no. > > I'll tell you what: maybe we should do away with the JSP 'coders'. > Seriously. > > > I don't want a .page for all the 200 html I have and I don't want to > > declare the 200 pages, because I am going to forget most of them in the > > .application and don't want to write the servlet either cause I don't > > need it... <phew/> > > Important message: TAPESTRY IS NOT FOR YOU. Stop thinking in 'pages'. For > what you want to do Turbine/Velocity would be a much better approach. > > > We agree that "you need it sometimes", it doesn't mean that all of us > > should pay for those cases where you need. Pay the price for what you > > Half the software world has to pay for the fucked up ideas that the losers > at Sun have foisted upon our profession. Payback time! > > > use, when you use it and if absolutely needed. Right now the price to > > entry is a bit high (2 days of mighty moi ;) for no good justification > > at my level. > > As a certified WO trainer I can assure you that WO has at least a 3 month > climbing curve - for people who grok OO. I usually calculate 4-6 months of > playground development before people are up for serious projects. Training > countless people successfully has so far proven me (and several > colleagues) right. > What's with the 'instant expert' mentality? > > > Introducing complexity as you go is the staple of a superior product. I > > am worried that you guys take pride in the price to entry to your > > framework. > > No, 'we' don't. However we _do_ understand that linear complexity curves > are at best an illusion. > Btw, you just described a common complaint about EJB and its byzantine > architecture. I'd like to hear you rant about that. > > The optional flexibility that you want _will_ lead to an architectural and > development/best practices split. Having it 'both ways' is a sure recipe > for desaster; if averting that means pissing off 'the JSP crowd' I'm all > for it. > > sorry Marc - most people who decided to look into Tapestry have seen the > other side of the fence, while keeping an open mind all the way though. I > suggest you try that, too. And - no offense - if you think that you're so > smart that you need two friggin' days to grok something like Tapestry or > WebObjects you're naive beyond hope. > > -h > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Tapestry-developer mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-developer ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Tapestry-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-developer
