Seems I am wrong in my earlier post.
Emm, but there is a lot of discussion around the need for compatibility. Why
is it so desirable, it seems to posit a large ongoing project that spans
both 4 and 5. Why would such a project need to hook up to 5?
Adam

On 28/07/06, Kris Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I actually prefer hivemind to Spring. Just my 2 cents. I find it easier to
learn and better at what it does.

Kris


----- Original Message ----
From: Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tapestry users <users@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 3:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions


Sometimes missing features is not a bad thing. If you want people to use
your framework, you need to implement something they can use.
Maybe losing some features and gaining some compatibility isn't such a bad
thing. The rest could come later. This is not a race.

On 7/28/06, D&J Gredler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I completely agree with you, and I really wish Spring were up to the
task.
> However, Howard seems to have done his homework and come to the
conclusion
> that it can't provide the features he needs for Tap5 (see
> http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/ioc/index.html).
>
> In my personal ideal world, Spring would have implemented the
namespacing,
> abstraction, visibility and distributed configuration features he needs,
> and
> we could all reuse our Spring knowledge when we find we need to extend
> Tap5.
> At this point all I can hope for is that they implement some of that
stuff
> in time for Tap6 :-)
>
> On 7/28/06, Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I support the idea that leaving HiveMind is good.
> > But not for a new IoC container. We should be using something that has
> > more
> > market share, like the Pico Container or the container used by Spring.
> > Why are we writing a *new* IoC container? Why not standardise
Tapestry,
> > that
> > does something no other framework does, on components known throughout
> the
> > developer community?
> >
> > Its all about reuse. Reuse components, reuse examples spread through
the
> > web, reuse the knowledge you acquired on different projects.
> >
>
>


--
Cumprimentos,
Rui Pacheco

Reply via email to