I with you, here. But (as you know, 'cause you did it) sometimes you
have to start over to get it right. One can architect one into a
corner, and evolving back into a good state isn't always possible.
Christian.
On 23-Oct-07, at 11:51 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Let me repeat ... I have seven years of experience (in Tapestry) on
how NOT
to be backwards compatible. T5 is all about ensuring future backwards
compatibility without compromising the ability to enhance the
framework
going forward.
On 10/23/07, Christian Gruber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, whatever. I give in. I'll go and use T4 and whine at Howard
now. Oh wait, no I won't. I'll work on T5 and try to encourage it
into as re-usable, and less brittle and change-vulnerable a form as I
can, so that there is more likelihood of upgradability. (Howard's
doing quite well about that already)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
