incubator-photark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Suhothayan Sriskandarajah <suhotha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Social Features in PhotArk UI
Date Sun, 10 Jul 2011 01:54:13 GMT
On 10 July 2011 00:12, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Subash Chaturanga <subashsdm@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Umashanthi Pavalanathan
> >> <umashanthip@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > During an offline discussion with Luciano, we discussed about the UI
> >> > technology. Had two choices: dojo and jQuery; finally we decided to
> use
> >> > dojo, since it is being used in PhotArk UI already. In case if we need
> >> more
> >> > features we can get them from jQuery or some other library.
> >>
> >> What are the community thoughts about jQuery versus Dojo ? Should we
> >> consider anything other then dojo for the UI on the REST branch ?
> >>
> >
> > +1 for Dojo.
> >
> > When considering GWT over other well known js frameworks like JQuery or
> > Dojo, people who are good at front end designing, most of them
> comfortable
> > with having HTMLs to structure and style them with CSS(which is pretty
> clean
> > and straightforward ). But in GWT we are kinda forced to use decent MVC
> and
> > client-server design patterns which may have a bit of a learning curve
> for
> > new developers.
> >
> > So in terms of migration to GWT in REST, we should consider the
> adaptability
> > of it with our future PhotArk contributors. There is no such huge
> advantage
> > of using GWT over Dojo except for java developers. But there are many
> > developers who are from .NET, C++, PHP backgrounds. So such person might
> not
> > interested in understanding GWT and contribute to us. And also, as Suho
> > mentioned, we have the advantage of reusing front end codes straight away
> > from trunk if we stick to Dojo.
> >
> >
>
> +1 for continue to use a JavaScript framework. I believe that, if you
> are doing a java application, use java, if you are doing a browser ui,
> use the native capabilities of the browser (html, javascript, css)
> which will give you the most flexibility.
>
>
> Yes +1 for  JavaScript framework

Regards
Suho

> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message