Well, if we can get enough of the community to say "Howard! Build us something better, and F**K backwards compatibility!" then I can do that, and maybe just a little bit more :-)
The reality is that I'm percolating with ideas of how to make Tapestry better, or make something Tapestry-like better, but probably can't or won't do them because that would totally fracture the community, way worse than the 3.0 -> 4.0 upgrade ... which, in fact, is not too bad. On 11/1/05, Scott Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Personally I think I would prefer to have the annotations define the default > situation, and the xml overrides the annotations. That would more useful > overall in deploying to clients and only modifying the xml files if > necessary, without recompiling the source code. > > -Scott > > > On Wed 2 November 2005 01:26, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > > Actually, that's not how it works in Tapestry; the annotations > > override the XML, not the other way around. > > > > I was discussing a more general case of frameworks where annotations > > define configuration values (such as the name of a table) without > > providing recourse to override that value for a particular deployment > > environment. Those frameworks need a way to override the annoation > > values, such as an auxillary XML file. > > > > On 11/1/05, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In a recent blog post, Howard mentioned that in Tapestry 4 annotation > > > values can be overridden via XML too. Has anyone been able to get this > > > to work? I've found that in a few cases, I'd prefer to use annotations > > > since they get inherited and can be easily overridden by subclasses. > > > However, I tend to have that odd page that really doesn't need a page > > > class, so I'd like to just use a page spec (indeed, I may already have a > > > page spec for that page). The page spec defines the page class as my > > > base class, so within the spec, I'd like to be able to override the > > > annotation value. Thus far, I haven't been able to do it without Tapestry > > > complaining that the property in question already exists. > > > > > > So, have I just been doing something wrong? The blog posts seems to > > > indicate that I ought to be able to do this. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Kevin > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
