1) Documentation: It is one thing to remove dependencies on framework interfaces but quite another to leave the developer hanging with no documentation. Programming by convention is programming in the dark if the convention is not known. 2) Although Tapestry claims to be POJO, you still have to have a contract (whether it is methods by convention or annotated methods). In the long run whether this is really better than interface implementation is not fully proven (much like the current debate of whether dynamically typed languages will prove more difficult to maintain in the long run). 3) Lack of a component marketplace: Wow, 4 years on and this is still on my list. We wrote a gigantic application in Tapestry 3 which is still in production. But we've decided to write all new apps in JSF with the aim of quickly adopting 2.0 when the spec is released. The main reason - a plethora of components to choose from. 4) Developer mindshare: Our analysis with Tapestry 3 shows that for every developer we hire, we have to write off 2-4 weeks until they become well versed in Tapestry. I don't believe T5 will be any different. You cannot argue against a standard like JSF that is supported by vendors. The lack of penetration of JSF speaks to its terrible initial design which hopefully will be rectified in 2.0

I don't believe Tapestry will dwindle and die but I don't see it becoming the defacto standard ala Struts in the early 2000s.

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Pedro Januário" <prnjanua...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 5:43 AM
To: "Tapestry users" <users@tapestry.apache.org>
Subject: Re: T5: What is NOT beautiful about Tapestry?

I totally agree with Hugo's ideia.
The wiki sounds good and should be a easy to make documentation about common
problems.

2009/4/30 Hugo Palma <hugo.m.pa...@gmail.com>

I agree a book would be great, what happened to the tapestry5-book
project http://code.google.com/p/tapestry5-book/ ?

Still, i think a lot better could be done with the online documentation.
I believe the structure of the online documentation should be very
similar to a book, it should start with the basics and evolve to more
"hardcore" stuff from there. Just the fact that the current
documentation is structured with only one level of depth and the list
of item is ordered alphabetically makes the task of finding some
information much more difficult.

I for example really like how the hibernate documentation is
structure, i usually have to problem finding what i'm looking for
there.
So, maybe the wiki could be a starting place for the birth of a
documentation with such a structure.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Blower, Andy
<andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk> wrote:
> I think you hit the nail on the head Carl. The documentation is okay
generally (some bits poor, some very good) but there is not enough to tie it all together and guide new developers so they know what they can do with T5.
I'm not convinced that the main documentation should attempt this on its
own, or whether it should strive to be a great reference with some more
higher level introductory/discovery bits along with a good published book to
handle introducing everything and tying it together. Having the only
published book for T5 being so out of date is a huge problem for the
framework in my opinion.
>
> I don't think a wiki is the answer to this, I really like knowing that
the documentation that I'm looking at is for a specific version of Tapestry
and is updated when the code is - I would not want to lose that.
>
> Andy.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carl Crowder [mailto:carl.crow...@taptu.com]
>> Sent: 29 April 2009 22:04
>> To: Tapestry users
>> Subject: Re: T5: What is NOT beautiful about Tapestry?
>>
>> Discovery of it's parts. Franky the documentation is lacking and even
>> with reading the mailing list, reading the howtos wiki, buying the
>> Tapestry 5 book and working with it for over a year I still come >> across
>> things I never knew existed that would have solved a problem I've had.
>> I
>> often spend ages writing something myself after searching for a
>> solution.
>>
>> What's beautiful about Tapestry? That almost every problem has a >> simple
>> solution built in. What's not beautiful about Tapestry? That I
>> generally
>> find these solutions by accident, and way after I've written my own!
>>
>> Lots of things are obvious and easy to understand once you know what
>> they are but it's learning what they are that is the problem. I've >> been >> waxing lyrical about Tapestry where I work and while the developers >> who
>> tried it love it, their main gripe is always that it's difficult to
>> understand what it can do.
>>
>> The cookbook is the right idea but it's only got 5 entries right now.
>> It
>> needs to be way more comprehensive
>>
>> Inge Solvoll wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > I have been reading the "beautiful" thread and added my opinion >> > about
>> what's
>> > great about Tapestry. It's nice to sum up why we all are so excited
>> about
>> > this, it obviously makes both us and the creator(s) feel good about
>> > ourselves. But for a little while, I challenge us all to stop >> > tapping
>> each
>> > others' backs and go into depth about what's not to like about our
>> beloved
>> > framework.
>> >
>> > The most obvious questions that could be asked probably have some
>> very
>> > obvious answers. But T5, as I see it, is all about addressing stuff
>> that
>> > other frameworks have given up on and create excellent
>> implementations
>> > rather than just looking the other way. Difficult and uncomfortable
>> > questions should be addressed the same way.
>> >
>> > So:
>> >
>> > What are the main reasons that T5 isn't one of the "big ones", when
>> we all
>> > seem to agree that it is so much better than most other frameworks
>> out
>> > there? Why is T5 NOT beautiful?
>> >
>> > Hope I'm not insulting anyone, I'm a big fan too, I just think this
>> actually
>> > could lead to significant insight :)
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Inge
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org




--
Cumprimentos...
Pedro Januário


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org

Reply via email to