Hi,

> 2) I like the back button support.  My thinking is that extending Wicket's
> AJAX integration to also support the back button (somehow) is a must.
> Virtually everyone who uses Wicket will use it's AJAX functionality.  Almost
> all of these will need solve this problem.  Sure would be nice if it was
> included.
There are plans to do this. However, it's a complicate problem that a
simple solution won't cut. We have a server side part in place though.
It's the javascript that needs to be extended, but our resources are
too limited currently to do that.
> 3) The design-by-inheritance model (WebPage, AbstractBehavior, etc). has
> produced a somewhat fragmented library.  Reminds me of the days of MFC.
> T5's approach in this respect seems quite attractive.
Would you mind elaborating on this a little? I kind of fail to see
what's wrong with inheritance and why are people avoiding it like a
plague nowadays.
Is it really that much better to have your code annotated and called
by reflection/bytecode generation? How discoverable such API is? How
can you navigate such code? (forget call hierarchy).

As a sidenote, I remember Igor building @OnBeforeRender like
annotations, but he wasn't very happy with it and neither was I.

-Matej
>
> Thanks for listening,
> Erik
>
> On 8/22/07, Konstantin Ignatyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > My story:
> >
> > I have been very satisfied Tapestry 3 used and T3 has
> > helped tremendously with building applications in the
> > past.
> >
> > Then I was busy doing other things although keeping
> > eye on T and recently I needed to build a live
> > prototype quickly, naturally my first reaction was to
> > pick up Dreamweaver and try Tapestry 5.
> >
> > T5 is amazingly good BUT I needed Ajax support and at
> > this moment Wicket makes leaps and bounds around T5 in
> > this area.
> >
> > So I abandoned T5 and started using Wicket - so far I
> > am very satisfied with it although worry if Wicket is
> > production grade for high traffic sites because of its
> > heavy use of HttpSession as storage.
> >
> > So for now I will use Wicket for prototyping and small
> > apps and keep my eye on T5. T4 is no-go for me - I am
> > too lazy
> >
> > --- Chris Chiappone <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > > A colleague of mine and I had a discussion about
> > > this because he was
> > > sorting through new frameworks to use for a new
> > > project.  I have been
> > > using Tapestry since v3 and wanted him to give it a
> > > try.  Unfotunately
> > > he ended up picking Wicket because of the fear that
> > > Tapestry has
> > > issues with backward compatibility.  I am now
> > > wondering if I made the
> > > right choice in choosing tapestry for my
> > > applications.   He built his
> > > application quickly and it is impressive using
> > > Wickets built in AJAX
> > > components.  Upgrading in Tapestry has been a pain
> > > going from 3 - 4
> > > and obviously 5 isn't even possible.  I wish I could
> > > have choose tap 5
> > > for my latest project but it was too beta and
> > > doesn't play well with
> > > other frameworks, ie a large legacy app with a
> > > Struts like framework.
> > >
> > > Anyway its a hard decision, they both have plus' and
> > > minus'
> > >
> > > ~chris
> > >
> > > On 8/22/07, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I would say Tapestry 5 wins the challenge unless
> > > you plane to use T4.
> > > >
> > > > Tapestry 5 uses annotations, and this is a very
> > > important advanced feature
> > > > in Java. You don't need to extend WOComponent,
> > > WebPage or what ever.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think all frameworks will use the annotations in
> > > the future; the question
> > > > is when is available.
> > > >
> > > > T5 does and it's ready.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In other words, the real question you should ask
> > > "Do I want to use
> > > > annotations or classical framework?"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Try T5 a little, and you will fast mention the
> > > power of annotations.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Signature IT-Consult Armainak Sarkis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Alex Shneyderman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > > <users@wicket.apache.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:13 AM
> > > > Subject: wicket vs tapestry ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >I just started to look for a component based
> > > framework. I came across
> > > > > both tapestry and wicket (and it would be hard
> > > not to as you guys
> > > > > share the same host) but I kind of fail to see
> > > what the differences
> > > > > are?
> > > > >
> > > > > From my limited experiments with both, wicket
> > > and tapestry seem to be
> > > > > quite similar. So, I wonder if there is anything
> > > I am not seeing?
> > > > > Anyone has a comparisson map of wicket vs
> > > tapestry?
> > > > >
> > > > > Alex.
> > > > >
> > > > > PS: I like both frameworks for their lightness I
> > > just feel that I will
> > > > > need to stick with one to be pragmatic :-(
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ~chris
> > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Konstantin Ignatyev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth, humans will add fifteen
> > million tons of carbon to the atmosphere, destroy 115 square miles of
> > tropical rainforest, create seventy-two miles of desert, eliminate between
> > forty to one hundred species, erode seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add
> > 2,700 tons of CFCs to the stratosphere, and increase their population by
> > 263,000
> >
> > Bowers, C.A.  The Culture of Denial:  Why the Environmental Movement Needs
> > a Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public Schools.  New York:  State
> > University of New York Press, 1997: (4) (5) (p.206)
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to