I agree, while the trolls on here tend to use a similar technique to bring up moot points (especially things that were answered in the previous few days), we should not jump to conclusions about someone with a genuinely reluctant team.
Here is a tip: Have the developers who opposed the use of Tapestry actually used Tapestry? At all? Even just building from the archetype sample should give them a good feel as to whether they want to spend a part of their life with it. It's hard to quell the fears of developers who themselves don't bother to dabble in new technologies. As others have pointed out in past threads, it's silly for us (especially Howard) to put blinders on with regards to new technologies. It's much more efficient to incorporate / learn from the ingenuity of others, rather than just rely on ourselves. It's like saying "I don't want to eat at an Italian restaurant because their new dishes don't taste great with their old dishes, and I heard the lead chef was eating at a French restaurant the other day instead of being locked in his kitchen making new recipes. So we're gonna go with Hot Pockets instead." On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <hls...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's a little early to start dropping the "T" bomb. > I'd like to thank Thiago for his response ... it's dead on. > > Although the upgrade from 5.0 to 5.1 was not quite as seamless as I would > have liked, for the majority of users it represented a simple switch in > dependencies, with a number of new features (and speed improvements) for > free. > > That is the pattern for the future ... 5.2 will add new features and should > be an even easier upgrade than 5.0 to 5.1. > > Right now stability (the stable 5.1 release) is a good thing. No version of > Tapestry, or any other web framework, will ever be "complete" -- there's > always more to add, more to refine. There are a few annoyances and gaps in > 5.1 that will be addressed in 5.2 but the best thing I can do for the > community is work on documentation. > > Right now, I'm a bit busy helping two teams upgrade 4.1 apps to 5.1, and > doing some additional support besides, not to mention training engagements > and speaking engagements (NFJS, ApacheCon, Devoxx, with more coming). So > don't expect me to maintain the level of commits I did leading up to the 5.1 > release! > > In fact, I've been purposefully staying away from coding 5.2, because once I > get working on the code, it will be that much harder to stay disciplined and > work on the book. > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Angelo Turetta < > aturetta+apa...@bestunion.it <aturetta%2bapa...@bestunion.it>> wrote: > >> On 24/09/2009 16:40, Gerald Bauer wrote: >> >>> They presented evidence that Tapestry has a bad track record on >>> backwards compatibility. They also mentioned that the fact that Tapestry >>> is >>> a one man project it is too risky to adopt in our company. >>> >> >> Can you please provide some additional reference about your company, or >> your project. >> >> I don't know, something tells me we have another email address to add to >> http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/Tapestry5Trolls >> >> Angelo. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org >> >> > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > Creator of Apache Tapestry > > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn > how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! > > (971) 678-5210 > http://howardlewisship.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
