On Wed 2 November 2005 09:55, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > 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. > I wasn't actually complaining, because I like using the new system with the annotations and all. I was just making the point that, given a preference, I would see that as the superior path. But of course you do have to ensure that upgrading to Tapestry4 is fairly painless, and you obviously are more aware than I what design decisions will impact upon that.
Nor would I say "this is urgent", but perhaps by suggesting these ideas they might eventually get considered along with future plans for the evolution. regards, Scott --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
