tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Menard <kmen...@servprise.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (TAPESTRY-2183) Support Java Portlet Specification V2 - JSR-286
Date Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:06:31 GMT
Well, I clearly have a different POV, but I don't necessarily think
comparing Tapestry to something else is all that bad.  Every framework has
something that it does better than others.  People see it and naturally want
it their framework of choice.  So long as what they want isn't fundamentally
at odds with how the framework is structured, I don't see that being a
particularly big problem.

For example, I went to Django land for a little while after T4 and before T5
just to try something new.  Django has some interesting ideas that I would
love to see implemented in Tapestry.  On the whole, however, I don't think
Django even comes close to what Tapestry can provide.  I definitely don't
want to see Tapestry become Django, but there's no reason not to make a good
framework better by using someone else's ideas.

FWIW, I haven't really gotten drawn into the Wicket / Tapestry debate and
don't know much about it, other than that for whatever reason, one exists.
So, I could very well be looking at the issue naively.


On 3/12/08 11:24 AM, "Jesse Kuhnert" <jkuhnert@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wouldn't really care if it were mentioning wicket once,  but I think
> I can recall at least 7 or 8 (possibly more) of the same exact
> requests attempting to use "framework X has or will have it" as the
> reason why it should be done.   After a while it starts to feel like
> being bullied.
> I guess I'm alone in that feeling though,  so sorry to all for my
> comments.  (not that I'm sorry for making them,  but don't want to
> make everyone else feel uncomfortable)
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Davor Hrg <hrgdavor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree with kevin on this,
>>  also Jesse is too aggressive when someone mentions wicket.
>>  Mentioning wicket is not a very good way to push an
>>  issue, but the response was definitely way too aggressive.
>>  ... somewhere in the apache docs is said that beng a comitter:
>>  (it's not a quote, I remember it something like this...)
>>  being a comiter is not about solving only the issues you are passionate
>> about,
>>  but concentrating on the issues the community is most interested in..
>>  Davor Hrg
>>  On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Kevin Menard <kmenard@servprise.com> wrote:
>>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see anything particularly
>>>  inflammatory here.  Maybe the priority level could be lowered.  Maybe Jan
>>>  could attach a patch.  But, JIRA is the appropriate channel for new feature
>>>  requests.  If they're not in the design goals of the framework, they could
>>>  be closed with reason.
>>>  I'd just urge everyone to relax a little bit and air grievances on the list
>>>  rather than in JIRA, which is the inappropriate medium.  Please note that
>>>  this is not an endorsement either way on the issue at hand.
>>>  --
>>>  Kevin
>>>  On 3/12/08 8:50 AM, "Jesse Kuhnert (JIRA)" <dev@tapestry.apache.org> wrote:
>>>>     [
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-2183?page=com.atlassian.jira
>>>> .pl
>>>> ugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12577834#actio
>>>> n_1
>>>> 2577834 ]
>>>> Jesse Kuhnert commented on TAPESTRY-2183:
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>> I just don't think you understand how open source works Jan.
>>>> If it was really that important then you should:
>>>> a) Make a go of portlet support yourself.
>>>> b) Have your company pay Howard to do it.
>>>> The source is right there,  so anyone can in theory jump right in and do
>>>> it.
>>>> That's how it works.
>>>>> Support Java Portlet Specification V2 - JSR-286
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>>>>                 Key: TAPESTRY-2183
>>>>>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-2183
>>>>>             Project: Tapestry
>>>>>          Issue Type: New Feature
>>>>>          Components: Portlet
>>>>>    Affects Versions: 5.0
>>>>>            Reporter: Jan Vissers
>>>>>             Fix For: 5.1
>>>>> Specification will be finished early 2008. We need a framework that allows
>>>>> us
>>>>> to write JSR-286 portlets, would be nice if we could stick with T5 for
>>>>> this.
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

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

View raw message