jesse, i didnt mean you, i replied to liigos point of view and i was also pretty sure that we get an upgrade path - so, i didnt want to "fuss", i just wanted him to think about the non-programmatic rest of any OS project... and these are the users and the business-guys that say, "yes use it, because of a, b , c and d".
regards korbinian > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Jesse Kuhnert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 16:31 > An: Tapestry users > Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions > > I really don't see what all the fuss is about anymore. I've > already stated that I'll be providing "some" form of T4 > extension to upgrade to T5 when the time comes for it. > > I've been wanting some of the features in T5 almost since the > first day I started using Tapestry. I'm willing to go through > the pain of developing a > T4 upgrade extension to it if that's what it takes to get me > there. I feel very comforatable with most of the code in T4 now . > > So..There we have it. :) > > On 7/30/06, Korbinian Bachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > this is a very simple minded thinking, liigo... > > > > what would an OS project be without the thousands that use > it ? - that > > tell u what is needed/ not needed ? the businessfolks that use it ? > > > > contributing means more than just adding some line of > code... im in a > > position where i choose the technology used for our company > by myself, > > and the current discussion about migrationpath is the basic for all > > business decisions followed. to be clearly: if there is no > migration > > path, i will see no use in using tapestry4 and 5 - no > matter how good > > they are ! > > > > when telling about business applications, i have apps in > mind that run > > 10, 20 years and more - so a basic upgrade path is necessary for at > > least some time, as we all have different problems than just the > > framework to be solved. > > > > choosing an technology usually implies using it a long time - and > > there u need a future vision > > > > regards, > > > > korbinian > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: liigo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 15:38 > > > An: Tapestry users > > > Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions > > > > > > tapestry is a open source project. > > > before you requires others do or not do something, think what you > > > have done for it. > > > don't selfish > > > > > > 2006/7/30, Michael Echerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Norbert Sándor wrote: > > > > > - rethink the IOC container of t5 (use hivemind 2.0 or > > > maybe Spring > > > > > instead of a custom "unsupported" solution) > > > > I also agree that we shouldn't have another IoC container. > > > Spring is > > > > the de facto standard. Either take Spring and work around > > > missing features. > > > > E.g. use naming conventions instead of namespaces or whatever > > > > until Spring adds this, or stick to Hivemind and > enhance this IoC > > > container > > > > to meet T5 needs. > > > > > - t5 should come with a compatibility layer for t4.X. > > > Jesse "promised" > > > > > this but Howard said nothing about it. > > > > +1... At least T4 users need a migration guide like the one we > > > > +used when > > > > migrating from T3 to T4. If it's a mechanical task it might be > > > > okay even if we need to trash a lot. Without a proper > replacement > > > > guide however users either won't migrate to T5 or the will > > > migrate away from Tapestry. > > > > > - the development resources should be focused first > on the 4.1 > > > > > branch, because the competing development of 4.1 and 5 delays > > > > > the release of 4.1. Users of t4 are currently waiting > for 4.1, not 5. > > > > > - the most important one: pay more attention to the > needs of the > > > > > current users - without them tapestry would be dead... > > > > Certainly true. Don't forget that Tapestry is a Apache > top-level > > > > project. That means "stability" and "maturity", too. > > > > > > > > Tapestry should evolve to maintain its large user base. > > > It's not yet > > > > time for another revolution! > > > > > > > > There are lot's of Tapestry applications out there - even > > > dozends that > > > > made it from T3 release candidates to T4 final ;-) - > that should > > > > be maintainable in future and we need a path to T5. No > need for a > > > > revolution for T5, maybe for T6 again, but T5 should be an > > > improvement > > > > release first. > > > > A revolution now, might lead to a community split (T4 vs. > > > T5) or even > > > > cause Tapestry to die in the rise of JSF. The best > > > framework won't be > > > > choosen if you can't build on it because it remains a > moving target. > > > > > > > > Developing for a moving target is something difficult > to explain > > > > to business people. Explaining to develop using a best-of-breed > > > > GUI framework instead of JSF & Co., because it's a, b, c, d, e, > > > does f,g,h > > > > better is easy, if you can tell them that an even better Tx > > > is on the > > > > way we can upgrade to, instead of waiting for the > > > vendor-driven JSF process. > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - > > > > 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] > > > > > > > -- > Jesse Kuhnert > Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer > > Open source based consulting work centered around > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
