incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrus Adamchik <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Date Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:43:16 GMT
I've never used Wicket, but I've done a fair number of webapps using  
similar component frameworks, such as WebObjects and Tapestry. All I  
can say - it is hard to argue about component frameworks with people  
who never used them. The benefit is essentially a different more  
developer-friendly abstraction. Of course it ties to the request/ 
response protocol.

Wicket site does seem to be heavy on marketing talk. While I find it  
very annoying (although this probably serves them in converting the  
masses), this doesn't mean it is a bad framework :-)


On Aug 24, 2006, at 3:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On 8/24/06, Ersin Er <> wrote:
>> ...
>> Wicket vs. Struts: 
>> Struts
> Bleh. That page confuses a lot of things. It conflates disparate
> components (e.g. Struts and JSP) in order to form opinions. It appears
> that Wicket also does state management "as a benefit" which I've
> rarely found to be true (any state in your http server kills
> scalability). And it somehow argues that Struts cannot handle multiple
> components on a page because they all go to one response handler for
> actions? Euh... seems each component would specify its own handler.
> On a pro, it seems to talk smack about JSP. Good. On a con, it uses a
> lot of buzzwords to try to demonstrate superiority. I don't know how
> "Wicket is fully object-oriented. You work with hierarchies of
> components and design your application as such. There is no need to
> bend your oo design to fit with the request-response nature of the
> HTTP protocol." will really help. The web *is* request/response.
> Whatever. ETIMEOUT.
> -0 (binding)
> Cheers,
> -g
> -- 
> Greg Stein,

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message