For most people, I'm sure it'd be Seam. Spring adds an extra layer of indirection, another IoC framework, more cumbersome configuration and support for other patterns that a few people really need. Not that I have anything against Spring (quite the contrary, I happily use it in multiple projects), but T5 with its advanced IoC, Seam and a few other supporting projects like c3p0 have been eating away what Spring has to offer to a point where it's not clear what the advantage is. Certainly, one answer is that it still supports many more frameworks and configurations, but that mostly makes it more complex, not easier for the user.
Kalle On 11/30/07, Angelo Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Kalle, > > I found this suggestion interesting, T5 already has Spring integration, > which one will be easier for the user, Seam or Spring? > > A.C. > > > Kalle Korhonen-2 wrote: > > > > > > JSF. In practice, integrating Tap5 with Seam might be the fastest way of > > getting practical results for a conversational scope, and wouldn't solve > > only one but two problems at the same time (conversations and > > session-per-conversation), of course at the expense of tying the > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/T5%3A-Is-Persist%28%22conversation%22%29-planned---Please--tf4888105.html#a14042379 > Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
