"Once it reaches that point there is no turning back because to change would be to admit they weren't perfect at some point in the past"
I wouldn't say that. If you have a look to the EJB1 en EJB2 api/spec, they differ 90% from EJB3. At least with EJB they really saw that the initial design was not sufficient... Hopefully the guys of JSF have the guts to do the same... On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Chris Colman <chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com > wrote: > > > > I know JSF is standard; what is your idea about current JSF > status? > > > > > > Just forget about it ... ;) > > Agreed! > > > JSF is way too complex for doing simple things. They -again- forgot > the > > KISS principle (Keep it Simple & Straightforward/Stupid). > > > > Wicket (but also Tapestry) is in my opinion a giant leap forward. I > > wondaer when the JSF spec will start look like this way of working... > > Probably never because often what starts out as an unjustifiable and > unattractive design that is adopted by people simply because it doesn't > stray too far from the legacy "framework" (JSP) soon becomes "justified" > on the basis of some irrational, semi religious beliefs. Once it reaches > that point there is no turning back because to change would be to admit > they weren't perfect at some point in the past. > > The good thing is that rational people are free to choose the best > solution regardless of what 'the standard' might be. > > It's a good thing that many programmers are usually freedom fighting > mavericks or we'd all be writing desktop apps in Visual Basic (not that > I ever used VB - I was more a C/C++ kind of guy =] ) > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > -- Pieter Degraeuwe Systemworks bvba Belgiëlaan 61 9070 Destelbergen GSM: +32 (0)485/68.60.85 Email: pieter.degrae...@systemworks.be visit us at http://www.systemworks.be
