I should point out that another alternative to EOF is Hibernate. It's very roughly similar to TopLink in its scope and it seems to be of fairly high quality.
>From: Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [Tapestry-developer] Re: WebObjects -> Tapestry >Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 20:44:21 -0400 > > >At 09:38 PM 10/9/2002 +0200, Magic Hat wrote: >>>I think many people are looking for a top-to-bottom WO like solution. >>>So >>>far the combination of technologies I've been playing with has been a >>>close >>>match (eclipse/ant/tapestry/cayenne). >> >>I see. That's what several other people are experimenting with. >> >>I'm still not quiet sure about which way to go: simply rewrite the all >>damn thing (EOF/WOF) or try to get along with cayenne/tapestry. > >Hi everybody, > >This kind of touches the topic I am really concerned about. With WebObjects >loosing market at an increasing speed (is it even there outside of Mac >platform nowadays?), it is important to be able to offer your >customers/employers a solution that has some competitive advantage over the >braindead mainstream, and at the same time would have enough of the >"standard" buzzwords in it (excluding the most evil like EJB). Such >solution should be: > >- at least as elegant and easy to use as WebObjects (I guess for the power >users) >- at least as powerful >- frontend without scripting in HTML >- backend without writing SQL. >- integration between frontend and backend shouldn't require a whole lots >of time >- having GUI tools for faster development is big plus > > >Originally I had high hopes for Jakarta projects. This was about a year >ago. I kind of figured that none of them had the O/R good enough to match >EOF, so I envisioned Cayenne would take this place. But at least frontend >looked promising. It turned out to be a big disappointment. None of the >"MVC" frameworks offered even 30% of what I needed. Some of them, well... >it is easier to use straight JSP. > >Now it looks like with Cayenne/Tapestry combo this goal can be achieved. >The components are there. > >I guess the ultimate step would be closer integration of all the relevant >frameworks/Eclipse plugins/GUI Tools into a single consistent distribution >with a single set of documentation and some kind of common philosophy. I am >not talking about merging individual projects into a single monster of >course, but rather having an independent project with a sole goal of >integrating the best components into a kind of a "platform". > >I know this is too far fetched, and the effort itself could be harder than >building each of the individual components. But I guess it will be a more >practical solution than reverse-engineering WebObjects. (Rewriting >WebObjects can be lots of fun of course ;-)) > >Sorry if this is too much offtopic. > > >Andrus Adamchik >http://objectstyle.org/cayenne/ > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >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 Joseph Panico [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------- 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
