That is an incredible statement! There have been numerous discussions on
this mailing list on the way T4 was made completely incompatible since it
was going to incorporate the very best and then T5 was made even more
incompatible to incorporate the latest. This has been a vexing issue with
quite a few people and organizations who invested in T3/T4 based projects.
By way of example, tell me how these products are not compatible within
major releases:
Websphere 4, 5, 6
WebLogic: 8, 9, 10
MySQL: 4, 5
Hibernate: 2, 3
There are some pieces that change and new features are introduced. But your
don't have to do a major rewrite to use the newer version. As an example, if
T5 were T4 + annotations, that would be a compatible release. But Howard has
chosen to rewrite it from the ground up with no compatiblity concern. Well,
thats his prerogative as this is open-source community driven development.
If I want, I can take the T3 code base and establish my own framework.
However, it also reflects on the popularly or lack of for Tapestry. This
topic has been beaten to death and I don't wish to bring it up again.
However, your point regarding versions was egregious.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Gruber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tapestry users" <users@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
I'm not sure where "incompatible releases" comes in. No one releases
1.0 -> 2.0 compatible releases except O/S vendors. That's typically
what the large version number change means - these are incompatible.
That's not a strike against Tapestry, that's an industry expectation.
Christian
On 18-Oct-07, at 6:45 AM, kranga wrote:
The question is very relevant. The concern of the project should be to
build out the business functionality using existing tools. If the tools
in question are not yet released and in production, there is a very
legitimate concern that the maintenance of the tool will become a
partial focus. Tapestry may be a compelling offering technologically,
but it has many other factors going against it - lack of a developer
mindshare, incompatible releases in the past, etc. We have used Tapestry
for big projects - but we are still using T3 since T4 and T5 are
completely incompatible. You cannot push beta software past project
stakeholders unless that beta software is also providing you with
competitive advantage. T5 has some able competitors in Wicket and
JSF/Stripes, etc while still lacking an ajax foundation for instance. So
the competitive advantage is not clear cut.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Shneyderman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: "Tapestry users" <users@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:22 AM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Roadmap
The one question I could not answer without looking ridiculous was
"What
happens to our multi-million dollar project if Howard is hit by a bus
tomorrow"
I think the question is irrelevant. The question you should be
answering:
Is the current base usable enough to push through on the project?. A
relevant after-question (if answer to the above is not exactly) to
answer
how easy it is to add the features you are missing if you have to. And
how easy it is to poke through the tapestry's source-base to fix bugs
that
might exist and you will find during the project's development.
If you can cross off HLS as your dependency then t5 is probably the
best
choice to make from what's available out there :-)
Alex.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
