I am fairly new at the whole web-application thing, and found learning Tapestry a bit hard going. However i did like the fact that once you "got into the groove", it was easy to do things...
I could never get Spindle to work properly, but i will try it again soon. One thing that would really help the community is if the devlopers could publish their components. ultimatly Tapestry is great for making reuseable components, but its kinda difficult to know where to start since you have to deal with three things (.java, .jwc, and .html) to make 1 component. Also more docs would be very much welcome! and with plently more examples... i think a good bunch of examples would be how to do common things with tapestry... The tutorial is a good start, but most people are developing something a bit more advanced than that, and the Virtual Library example, i think, is too large a step up from the tutorial. we probabaly need something in the middle... the direction that i would like to see Tapestry heading is dynamic html templates. at the moment the HTML is just a template for that should be on the HTML page, but in the future it would be good to have this HTML page's content somehow defined at runtime. i don't even know whether this is possible... Marc's comments were a tad harsh and i think he needs to give credit where it due Howard has done a great job in developing/maintaining/helping-people-understanding Tapestry... Hope this helps. Thanks, saqib --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 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 === message truncated === http://mobile.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Messenger for SMS - Always be connected to your Messenger Friends ------------------------------------------------------- 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
