tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francis Amanfo <fama...@tydex.com>
Subject Re: Tapestry 3.1 compatibility with 3.0?
Date Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:38:14 GMT
+1 on this one.

I think the changes made in 3.1 are so radical that 3.1 needs to be a 4.0 
release to avoid confusions.

However, I do have one question. Why the tight integration of Hivemind IOC 
in Tapestry 3.1? I've been doing my middle tier with Spring and have no 
short term plans to switch. Why must I be bothered with Hivemind 
configurations if I only need Tapestry soley for the presentation layer? 
Or am I missing something?

Rgds,

Frncs

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Erik Hatcher wrote:

> I've been building a new application from scratch using Tapestry 3.1 built 
> from CVS (I'll refresh it every few days as commits mandate to stay current). 
> I've encountered a few things that caused me to adjust my code.  I see some 
> of these items as pretty big barriers for folks adopting 3.1 sooner rather 
> than later or never.  Pleasantly Howard has made the 3.0 DTD's work just 
> fine, but I've been converting to using the 3.1-style of specification files 
> in order to learn the new way.
>
> The big things I've encountered are:
>
> 	- classes extending from BasePage must be made abstract, whereas this 
> was not the case in 3.0.  The whole abstract thing has been a pet peeve of 
> mine for ages and I try to avoid it by using setProperty/getProperty instead 
> of making abstract getters/setters.  I like that my IDE can allow me to 
> automatically add methods when I add a new interface, but having the class 
> abstract prevents this and adds to the run-time error possibilities.
>
> 	- IRequestCycle API has changed so that HttpServletRequest is not 
> accessible from it.  I understand the reason for the change, but my apps do 
> leverage that capability in 3.0.
>
> If we're going to make these types of incompatibilities then shouldn't we 
> call this new version 4.0 instead?
>
> I have been IM'ing with Howard when I encounter these barriers, and he 
> suggested I bring these items to the dev list.
>
> What do others feel about how compatible 3.1 should be with 3.0?
>
> 	Erik
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message