Hi. You are possibly correct. My main concern is that I have to upgrade from Tapestry 4 to... something. Given that Tapestry 5 is not compatible in the least I have allowed myself to look at the options.
I guess I am really asking for reasons to move from Tapestry to Wicket - particularlu if anyone has any experience of doing this which they could share. What were those reasons, and pros/cons after sampling both solutions. Thanks for pointing out that I was not clear. Daniel Frisk wrote: > > I actually read your mail but I didn't quite get it, what is your main > concern? > It seems to me like Wicket would be a perfect fit to your four criteria. > > // Daniel > jalbum.net > > > On 2008-10-30, at 21:05, GK1971 wrote: > >> >> Hi. I hope this email is appropriate for the forum - its my first time >> posting. >> >> My partner and I are in the process of working on a site that >> currently uses >> Tapestry 4 and must be reasonably scalable vertically (we have >> horizontally >> covered in a road map). I am looking around at technologies that we >> can >> pursue in the future that will provide us with a way of creating a >> wonderful >> experience for a user based on dynamic content with Java as a base >> language. >> >> I have used Tapestry 3 and 4 in prior lives in prior companies and as >> Tapestry 5 was still early a year ago when we started the project I >> decided >> to work with Tapestry 4 an understand that once the site was up and >> running >> we may look at rewriting the web layer in an updated framework, >> using the >> lessons we had learned along the way about our specific application. >> >> I have grown unhappy with Tapestry generally - for example, its clumsy >> handling of AJAX. Even a seasoned developer can write a Tapestry >> application >> which is incredibly complex and inefficient, also. I'm not certain its >> declarative approach in Tapestry 5 is a wise thing from a >> productivity point >> of view (maintenance). Debugging a Tapestry application can be >> difficult. >> >> I found myself looking at JSF, but we'd like to actually deliver a >> functioning site quickly and not have our hands tied by bureaucracy. >> I also >> looked into other frameworks, and short of writing something myself >> I have >> found the best for our needs to be Tapestry 5 (scares me - what will >> Tapestry 6 bring in terms of backward compatibility etc?) and Wicket. >> >> I'm liking the look of Wicket but I wondered if it would fill a few >> ideas I >> have. >> >> I have had significant issues with DOJO/Tapestry bugs that I cannot >> fix >> myself and that has limited productivity. I would like to write an >> AJAX >> library for myself and hook it into Wicket somehow. Would this be >> possible. >> I feel it may be a pain in Tapestry because there 'appears' to be >> such a >> high coupling with DOJO now. Would it be conceptually easy for me to >> write >> Javascript/AJAX and hook them into Wicket in a simple way? I >> understand >> Wicket has a good framework for AJAX but if I require to implement >> code of >> my own, is it easy to slip under the hood (with Tapestry this is >> very hard). >> >> Many forums have mentioned scalability is an issue, but I believe >> that this >> is down to an applications individual handling of state rather than >> the >> framework. Am I correct? I am not so worried about this vertical >> scaling as >> long as I can horizontally scale my application on many servers >> (which I can >> if I control state). >> >> What's the road map for Wicket? I understand it is now one of the main >> Apache projects (which is one reason I am looking at it), so I >> assume it >> won't disappear sometime next year after I have invested time and >> effort >> into developing with it. >> >> Please tell me you are not going to pull a 'Tapestry' on me and >> other users >> by making future versions so ridiculously incompatible I have to >> rewrite my >> project again? >> >> Honestly, I'm looking for a framework that will allow me to: >> >> 1) Utilize HTML templates (which you do, I understand). >> 2) Utilize CSS (which you do) files externally for my artist. >> 3) Utilize Javascript (which I assume you do). >> 4) Utilize a Java, component based web framework for creating a fast >> lightweight but rich user experience for my users (which I guess you >> do). >> >> I have just purchased Wicket in Action so as I can do some research, >> but I >> do appreciate your time if possible. >> >> Many thanks for your help, and your help. >> >> Regards, Graeme. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Moving-from-Tapestry-to-Wicket--tp20254394p20254748.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
