You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by Todd Orr <to...@gmail.com> on 2006/06/24 21:27:33 UTC
Tapestry, Spring, and Hibernate
I have a DAO layer that attempts to hide the implementation details
from its caller (per dao definition). This is managed by Spring and
objects are pulled out in my tap pages using the tapestry-spring lib.
This works well at face value. The issue is the infamous lazy-loading
of detached objects problem. Any reference to lazy-loaded objects is
throwing an exception. This is expected since the session is closed. I
know the solution is to reattach it either using hibernate's api or
tapernate. The problem with this approach is that it leaks the DAOs
implementation details into the Web layer. I do not desire this to
happen.
I've seen some posts suggesting that Tapernate can provide some
relief and if I'm willing to hack through the code (since there's no
or hardly any docs) I might be able to get it working with Spring.
This violates my guiding principal in this project, and that is
creating decoupled components. Tapernate, by it's very name, forces
concerns to bleed into the Tap layer. I'm hoping that there is some
other way.
This problem has come up before, but not in quite the same fashion as
this. Despite the slant against Spring that many have in this
community, I'm using it to wire my application together. I feel that
Spring offers me the right amount of features, ease of use, incredible
documentation, and de facto industry support. My problem seems to span
all three frameworks, but I thought I'd probe this group first.
Thanks in advance,
T
Tirade:
Please do not ask "why not just use Hivemind for dependency
injection". The fact that this has been brought up before is juvenile
and indicates that the poster doesn't care about the plethora of other
frameworks that exist because his is "the best". Let's all understand
that our community produces software that is generally utilized on a
best of breed basis and some of us differ on what the best is. In
order to be good OSS citizens, we should work with other frameworks,
not deny our users the ability to work with them because we deem them
bad for whatever snobbish reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
RE: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
I was merely speaking of Tapestry "out of the box." If you do wish to
customize, then, yes you do need to do some HiveMind magic. However, IMHO,
once you do start using HiveMind for configuration and services, you'll
become addicted (then I can start charging for my services...hehe). :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Longman [mailto:glongman@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 10:13 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
I would beg to differ. Hivemind is not optional in many cases, the
following are items that I think are not unusual things to do in
Tapestry and all require knowledge of Hivemind.
Override or provide new services:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/upgrade.html#upgrade.service
(This is the only ref I could find in the docs)
Custom Validators: http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/CreatingCustomValidators
Custom Translators:
http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/CreatingCustomTranslators
Use Friendly URLS:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/friendly-urls.html
Use any ASO other than "visit" or "global":
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/state.html
There are many others but I would consider them "stepping outside the box".
Geoff
On 6/24/06, Scott Russell <sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
>
> Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
> (like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that
integrate
> the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk about
that
> on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for your
database
> persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
>
> Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it
is
> used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use
it
> if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
> solution if you want.
>
> regards,
> Scott
>
> On Sunday 25 June 2006 10:05, kranga wrote:
> > We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry
3
> > and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead,
I
> > am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the
project.
> >
> > My questions are:
> > - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that
you
> > don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it
look
> > like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone
know
> > if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its
user-base
> > size and popularity when compared with Spring?
> >
> > - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So
that
> > would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is
the
> > 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> > negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt
the
> > framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost
impossible
> > to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a
> > low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and
> > require significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out
> > there?
> >
> > - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> > their website does look impressive.
> >
> > Your thoughts are appreciated...
> > KR
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
The Spindle guy. http://spindle.sf.net
Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman
Other interests: http://www.squidoo.com/spaceelevator/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by Geoff Longman <gl...@gmail.com>.
I would beg to differ. Hivemind is not optional in many cases, the
following are items that I think are not unusual things to do in
Tapestry and all require knowledge of Hivemind.
Override or provide new services:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/upgrade.html#upgrade.service
(This is the only ref I could find in the docs)
Custom Validators: http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/CreatingCustomValidators
Custom Translators: http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/CreatingCustomTranslators
Use Friendly URLS:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/friendly-urls.html
Use any ASO other than "visit" or "global":
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/state.html
There are many others but I would consider them "stepping outside the box".
Geoff
On 6/24/06, Scott Russell <sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
>
> Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
> (like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that integrate
> the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk about that
> on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for your database
> persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
>
> Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it is
> used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use it
> if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
> solution if you want.
>
> regards,
> Scott
>
> On Sunday 25 June 2006 10:05, kranga wrote:
> > We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> > and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> > am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
> >
> > My questions are:
> > - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that you
> > don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it look
> > like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone know
> > if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its user-base
> > size and popularity when compared with Spring?
> >
> > - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
> > would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
> > 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> > negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt the
> > framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost impossible
> > to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a
> > low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and
> > require significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out
> > there?
> >
> > - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> > their website does look impressive.
> >
> > Your thoughts are appreciated...
> > KR
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
The Spindle guy. http://spindle.sf.net
Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman
Other interests: http://www.squidoo.com/spaceelevator/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
RE: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
I would agree that it's a bit much more difficult to "grok", but we're
working on that what HiveMind 2.0! Yes, you don't need to know anything
about HiveMind, necessarily, to use Tapestry. But, if you want to
extend/enhance it (as you said), you do.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Russell [mailto:scottami72@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 9:39 PM
To: users@tapestry.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Tue enough, although I must say I had no problems plugging Spring in using
the
Spring integration jar. Very quick and painless.
I think that use of Hivemind is required when one needs to extend or enhance
or add new functionality to Tapestry itself. Certainly one could also use
Hivemind as a configuration engine for other non-Tapestry services, but it
isn't actually required for that purpose.
I don't mind Hivemind as an IoC container, but I have found it more
difficult
to grok than Spring.
-Scott
On Sunday 25 June 2006 11:34, James Carman wrote:
> That being said, Scott, it *is* much easier to "plug in" to Tapestry using
> HiveMind, since Tapestry itself is wired together using HiveMind.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Russell [mailto:scottami72@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 8:41 PM
> To: users@tapestry.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
>
> I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
>
> Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
> (like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that
> integrate the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see
talk
> about that on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for
> your database persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
>
> Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it
is
> used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use
it
> if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
> solution if you want.
>
> regards,
> Scott
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by Scott Russell <sc...@hotmail.com>.
Tue enough, although I must say I had no problems plugging Spring in using the
Spring integration jar. Very quick and painless.
I think that use of Hivemind is required when one needs to extend or enhance
or add new functionality to Tapestry itself. Certainly one could also use
Hivemind as a configuration engine for other non-Tapestry services, but it
isn't actually required for that purpose.
I don't mind Hivemind as an IoC container, but I have found it more difficult
to grok than Spring.
-Scott
On Sunday 25 June 2006 11:34, James Carman wrote:
> That being said, Scott, it *is* much easier to "plug in" to Tapestry using
> HiveMind, since Tapestry itself is wired together using HiveMind.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Russell [mailto:scottami72@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 8:41 PM
> To: users@tapestry.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
>
> I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
>
> Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
> (like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that
> integrate the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk
> about that on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for
> your database persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
>
> Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it is
> used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use it
> if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
> solution if you want.
>
> regards,
> Scott
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
RE: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
That being said, Scott, it *is* much easier to "plug in" to Tapestry using
HiveMind, since Tapestry itself is wired together using HiveMind.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Russell [mailto:scottami72@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 8:41 PM
To: users@tapestry.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
(like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that integrate
the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk about that
on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for your
database
persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it is
used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use it
if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
solution if you want.
regards,
Scott
On Sunday 25 June 2006 10:05, kranga wrote:
> We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
>
> My questions are:
> - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that
you
> don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it look
> like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone know
> if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its
user-base
> size and popularity when compared with Spring?
>
> - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
> would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
> 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt
the
> framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost
impossible
> to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a
> low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and
> require significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out
> there?
>
> - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> their website does look impressive.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated...
> KR
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by Scott Russell <sc...@hotmail.com>.
I'm guessing you mean Hivemind, not Hibernate.
Hibernate is an ORM that is completely independant of Tapestry. Some users
(like myself) use it and thus seek out (or develop) solutions that integrate
the two (eg. tapernate, honeycomb, cognition). You might see talk about that
on the mail;ing list but unless you intend to use Hibernate for your database
persistence then you don't need to worry about it.
Hivemind is a configuration engine that Tapestry is built on. Whether it is
used by any other project doesn't matter. You are not constrained to use it
if you don't want - use Spring, use Picocontainer, use your home-grown
solution if you want.
regards,
Scott
On Sunday 25 June 2006 10:05, kranga wrote:
> We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
>
> My questions are:
> - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that you
> don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it look
> like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone know
> if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its user-base
> size and popularity when compared with Spring?
>
> - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
> would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
> 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt the
> framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost impossible
> to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a
> low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and
> require significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out
> there?
>
> - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> their website does look impressive.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated...
> KR
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by Mike Grundvig <mi...@electrotank.com>.
Re: Hibernate. It's used all over the place by many applications. It isn't
really associated with IOC containers or even web applications in generally
as it's simply (ha!) a database abstraction/mapping framework. Whether you
use Tapestry or not, Hibernate is excellent at what it does. With that said,
Hibernate is in no way associated with Tapestry.
Re: Tapestry Migration. Tapestry 3 isn't directly compatible with 4 as it
stands, depending on how complicated your application is and how much
underlying tweaks you have made, you might need to rewrite a little bit:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/#Upgrading+from+Tapestry+3.0
As for Tapestry 5, that is quite a while off. I certainly wouldn't sit
around waiting to migrate as 4 provides a great deal of useful features and
conveniences.
You mention the steep learning curve next; I simply have to disagree there.
I've only recently begun using Tapestry and I've found it dramatically
simpler to work with then most other frameworks. Particularly Struts and
ASP.NET. I feel that this is the case because Tapestry gives the web an
intuitive event-driven feel to it. It just isn't that complicated and
requires very little wire up to tie pages together. As for commercial
programmer experience that's an issue with most frameworks. Even JSF
developers are exceptionally hard to come by right now. I do agree though
that selling Tapestry to management is a bit tough these days. Hopefully
time will help with that. As with all opinions though, your mileage may
vary.
Re: Echo2, nope, sorry. Not used that one.
Michael Grundvig
Electrotank, Inc
http://www.electrotank.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "kranga" <kr...@k2d2.org>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 7:05 PM
Subject: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
> We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
>
> My questions are:
> - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that
> you don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it
> look like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone
> know if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its
> user-base size and popularity when compared with Spring?
>
> - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
> would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
> 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt
> the framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost
> impossible to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it
> provides a low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be
> compatible and require significant effort, then why not evalulate other
> frameworks out there?
>
> - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> their website does look impressive.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated...
> KR
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by Henri Dupre <he...@gmail.com>.
On 6/24/06, kranga <kr...@k2d2.org> wrote:
>
> We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
We did migrate our website from tapestry 3 to tapestry 4. That was a complex
and long process (not everything was related to tapestry 4... some other
stuff was related to Tomcat JK, etc.).
Now management keeps asking to add new features and with all the code
cleanup that we were able to do in the move from Tapestry 3 to Tapestry 4,
changes have become way easier to manage.
The migration was completly worth it.
Hivemind is not straightforward (lets say there lacks documentation for
doing several simple tasks) but it makes the whole framework way more
flexible. These days it is not too bad, you can probably find copy/paste
stuff for most common tasks in this mailing list.
Hivemind reduces alot the amount of bad hacking in the code and allows to
customize the framework in a clean way.
Thanks,
Henri.
Re: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by kranga <kr...@k2d2.org>.
Duh! Yes, as you guys guessed, I meant Hivemind not Hibernate. I think I
need to hibernate a little more and get my mind back ...
Thanks for your input ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "kranga" <kr...@k2d2.org>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 8:05 PM
Subject: Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
> We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
> and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
> am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
>
> My questions are:
> - Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that
> you don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it
> look like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone
> know if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its
> user-base size and popularity when compared with Spring?
>
> - I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
> would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
> 4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
> negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt
> the framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost
> impossible to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it
> provides a low barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be
> compatible and require significant effort, then why not evalulate other
> frameworks out there?
>
> - Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
> their website does look impressive.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated...
> KR
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Tapestry 3 to 4.1 to 5
Posted by kranga <kr...@k2d2.org>.
We have a very large financial services applicaiton built with Tapestry 3
and it meets all the requirements for the project. But in looking ahead, I
am trying to get some data to guide technology decisions for the project.
My questions are:
- Hibernate is used extensively in 4.x and though the principal is that you
don't need to worry about Hibernate, the emails on this list make it look
like a lot of deviations from defaults require Hibernate. Does anyone know
if Hibernate is used outside of Tapestry? Specifically how is its user-base
size and popularity when compared with Spring?
- I've heard that 5 is not going to be backward compatible with 3. So that
would give me absolutely no reason to upgrade to 4.x anytime soon. Is the
4.x to 5 incompatibility true? If so, it also seems like Tapestry is
negatively skewed from a "business" perspective - high barrier to adopt the
framework (the learning curve is higher and frankly it is almost impossible
to find anyone in the market with Tapestry experience) but it provides a low
barrier to exit - if versions are not going to be compatible and require
significant effort, then why not evalulate other frameworks out there?
- Anyone have experience comparing this with Echo 2? The echo 2 demo on
their website does look impressive.
Your thoughts are appreciated...
KR
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry, Spring, and Hibernate
Posted by Todd Orr <to...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Mark. So far the OpenSessionInViewFilter has been working very well.
On 6/24/06, Mark <li...@mark-arnold.net> wrote:
> I think if you are mainly using Spring for most of your configuration,
> etc, you can also just use the OpenSessionInViewFilter that Spring provides.
> That way you stick with Spring as much as you can.
>
> I am doing the same thing and this is exactly where I got stalled right
> now, due to time-issues. Hope I'll get back into this soon to try it.
>
> MARK
>
> Todd Orr wrote:
> > I have a DAO layer that attempts to hide the implementation details
> > from its caller (per dao definition). This is managed by Spring and
> > objects are pulled out in my tap pages using the tapestry-spring lib.
> > This works well at face value. The issue is the infamous lazy-loading
> > of detached objects problem. Any reference to lazy-loaded objects is
> > throwing an exception. This is expected since the session is closed. I
> > know the solution is to reattach it either using hibernate's api or
> > tapernate. The problem with this approach is that it leaks the DAOs
> > implementation details into the Web layer. I do not desire this to
> > happen.
> >
> > I've seen some posts suggesting that Tapernate can provide some
> > relief and if I'm willing to hack through the code (since there's no
> > or hardly any docs) I might be able to get it working with Spring.
> > This violates my guiding principal in this project, and that is
> > creating decoupled components. Tapernate, by it's very name, forces
> > concerns to bleed into the Tap layer. I'm hoping that there is some
> > other way.
> >
> > This problem has come up before, but not in quite the same fashion as
> > this. Despite the slant against Spring that many have in this
> > community, I'm using it to wire my application together. I feel that
> > Spring offers me the right amount of features, ease of use, incredible
> > documentation, and de facto industry support. My problem seems to span
> > all three frameworks, but I thought I'd probe this group first.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > T
> >
> > Tirade:
> > Please do not ask "why not just use Hivemind for dependency
> > injection". The fact that this has been brought up before is juvenile
> > and indicates that the poster doesn't care about the plethora of other
> > frameworks that exist because his is "the best". Let's all understand
> > that our community produces software that is generally utilized on a
> > best of breed basis and some of us differ on what the best is. In
> > order to be good OSS citizens, we should work with other frameworks,
> > not deny our users the ability to work with them because we deem them
> > bad for whatever snobbish reason.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry, Spring, and Hibernate
Posted by Mark <li...@mark-arnold.net>.
I think if you are mainly using Spring for most of your configuration,
etc, you can also just use the OpenSessionInViewFilter that Spring provides.
That way you stick with Spring as much as you can.
I am doing the same thing and this is exactly where I got stalled right
now, due to time-issues. Hope I'll get back into this soon to try it.
MARK
Todd Orr wrote:
> I have a DAO layer that attempts to hide the implementation details
> from its caller (per dao definition). This is managed by Spring and
> objects are pulled out in my tap pages using the tapestry-spring lib.
> This works well at face value. The issue is the infamous lazy-loading
> of detached objects problem. Any reference to lazy-loaded objects is
> throwing an exception. This is expected since the session is closed. I
> know the solution is to reattach it either using hibernate's api or
> tapernate. The problem with this approach is that it leaks the DAOs
> implementation details into the Web layer. I do not desire this to
> happen.
>
> I've seen some posts suggesting that Tapernate can provide some
> relief and if I'm willing to hack through the code (since there's no
> or hardly any docs) I might be able to get it working with Spring.
> This violates my guiding principal in this project, and that is
> creating decoupled components. Tapernate, by it's very name, forces
> concerns to bleed into the Tap layer. I'm hoping that there is some
> other way.
>
> This problem has come up before, but not in quite the same fashion as
> this. Despite the slant against Spring that many have in this
> community, I'm using it to wire my application together. I feel that
> Spring offers me the right amount of features, ease of use, incredible
> documentation, and de facto industry support. My problem seems to span
> all three frameworks, but I thought I'd probe this group first.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> T
>
> Tirade:
> Please do not ask "why not just use Hivemind for dependency
> injection". The fact that this has been brought up before is juvenile
> and indicates that the poster doesn't care about the plethora of other
> frameworks that exist because his is "the best". Let's all understand
> that our community produces software that is generally utilized on a
> best of breed basis and some of us differ on what the best is. In
> order to be good OSS citizens, we should work with other frameworks,
> not deny our users the ability to work with them because we deem them
> bad for whatever snobbish reason.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org