Hi,

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Dan Simko <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I didn't read whole conversation but you don't need to choose between
> Wicket and AngularJS. We are using both technologies together and it works
> great. AngularJS has no global state so you can use many Angular ("island"
>

That's exactly what the demo mentioned does: it creates a page where all
logic/AJAX is done via Angular and Wicket page just acts as a script
generating the page.


> single page) apps in one Wicket page. For some use-cases is better Wicket

so you use Wicket and for some (not so many) is better Angular, so you
> embed Angular app to Wicket page.
>
> Best regards,
> Dan Simko
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > Make some noise about this (stupid) decision and when the higher
> management
> > realize the mistake they made they will ask you ;-)
> >
> > Martin Grigorov
> > Wicket Training and Consulting
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Richard W. Adams <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Whether the reasons are valid or not irrelevant. I only passed along
> what
> > > I have heard; don't necessarily agree with the rationales. As I said, I
> > > was not consulted (and probably never will be).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From:   Paul Bors <[email protected]>
> > > To:     "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > > Date:   01/03/2014 12:16 PM
> > > Subject:        Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Both reasons provided don't carry much wight.
> > >
> > > 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases
> > >     Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system
> > > administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k
> > public
> > > classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x
> > by
> > > myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one
> > by
> > > one.
> > >
> > > 2) Cost of tranning new developers
> > >     Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes
> > > fast
> > > adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps
> the
> > > new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many
> > > books avaialble on Wicket, see:
> > > http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/
> > >
> > > I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so
> > > long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to
> work
> > > while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print
> the
> > > free guide via:
> > > http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html
> > >
> > > I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it
> looks
> > > like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can
> very
> > > easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to
> your
> > > upper management.
> > >
> > > Anyhow, that's my two cents.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process,
> but I
> > > > understand there were two main factors:
> > > >
> > > > 1.  Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate
> > > > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from
> > > > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x.
> > > >
> > > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use
> > > > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years
> > > > experience), but have to admit  the leaning curve was pretty steep.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From:   Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro <[email protected]>
> > > > To:     [email protected]
> > > > Date:   01/03/2014 10:58 AM
> > > > Subject:        Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC
> > > over
> > > > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed
> > by
> > > > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with
> > > > productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that
> > > > developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be
> > > > completely
> > > > productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative
> way.
> > > The
> > > > only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an
> > > issue.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Ernesto
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is
> > > > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended
> > > recipient.
> > > >  Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by
> > > others,
> > > > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express
> > > > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law.  If you are
> not
> > > the
> > > > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the
> > > > e-mail and destroy all copies.
> > > > **
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > **
> > >
> > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is
> > > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended
> > recipient.
> > >  Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by
> > others,
> > > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express
> > > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law.  If you are not
> > the
> > > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the
> > > e-mail and destroy all copies.
> > > **
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Regards - Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro

Reply via email to