On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:36:47 -0200, Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us>
wrote:
Is this because of the package names? I would say its not much of an
issue renaming the package names for us tapestry users with good tools.
Not only that: Howard once vehemently and publicly said that there
wouldn't be a Tapestry version 6 and many people echoed it (me included)
as a way to lower the perception that Tapestry doesn't care about
backward-compatibility. We had a serious trolling problem before.
Check this thread:
http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-6-td2415654.html. Some guy
makes up a false Howard statement that T6 would be released in the 4th
quarter of 2008. (Thiago looks at calendar) hey, it's 4th quarter 2011 and
no Tapestry 6! :P
This thread also has a lengthy discussion about having a T6 or not, but
without trolling:
http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-6-Famous-last-words-td2432735.html.
Best comment: Michel Gentry: "Simple: T5.0 => T5.1 => ... => T5.9 =>
T7.0". hehehe. Or my own comment: Another path would be T5.0 => T5.1 =>
... => T5.9 => ... T5.10 ... (supposing backward-compatility is kept
besides for minor things, of course) Or do it the Sun way: T5.0 => T5.1 =>
... => T5.4 => ... T9 :P
Anyway, after Chrome and specially Firefox, version numbers have becoming
meaningless. And code always matter. :) I can't wait for Tapestry 5.99! :P
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
and instructor
Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda.
http://www.arsmachina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
