You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com> on 2003/03/13 15:28:32 UTC
RE: 2.3 to 2.4 Migration Errors
It changed from <component-alias> to <component-type>.
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stav [mailto:cclunis@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 7:11 AM
> To: Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Subject: RE: 2.3 to 2.4 Migration Errors
>
>
> Those were easy fixes.
>
> I have done that already. The error I got was with
> regard to specifying of the component-alias in the
> application spec.
>
> Apparently this has changed. Where or how do you now
> specify components?
>
> --- "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
> > Backwards compatibility is still there. What's
> > probabably messing you up is
> > minor issues, such as the prefix "net.sf.tapestry"
> > being changed to
> > "org.apache.tapestry" on key configuration values in
> > web.xml.
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
> > http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stav [mailto:cclunis@yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 8:04 PM
> > > To: Tapestry users
> > > Subject: RE: 2.3 to 2.4 I am LOST!!
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Howard,
> > >
> > > I am trying to migrate my 2.3 app to 2.4.
> > >
> > > I don't want to re-arrange anything. I like and
> > need
> > > the component-ized nature of Tapestry as a whole.
> > >
> > > For example I can provide my client with a jar and
> > > some basic classpath and config settings and my
> > > Tapestry based component can be plugged in to
> > almost
> > > any existing web app to add functionality without
> re-inventing the
> > > wheel.
> > >
> > > I guess what I am trying to say is that I was
> > hoping
> > > for a more seamless upgrade path and backward compatibility.
> > >
> > > I know that I may have over-reacted somewhat - end
> > of
> > > day and I am tired, I apologize :o)
> > >
> > > Flexibility is good but I hope that Tapestry does
> > not
> > > sell it's soul to applease the JSP fans.
> > >
> > > Just my 2 cents.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Stav.
> > >
> > > --- "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Luis Neves [mailto:lneves@netcabo.pt]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:18 PM
> > > > > To: Tapestry users; Stav
> > > > > Subject: Re: 2.3 to 2.4 I am LOST!!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday 12 March 2003 22:51, Stav wrote:
> > > > > > I don't know what the hell happen in 2.3 to
> > 2.4
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Easy answer: A lot :-)
> > > > > For an overview of what changed check the
> > "What's
> > > > new" page
> > > > > at the web site <http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry>
> > > > /new_frame.html>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just wanted to test out the Palette and
> > > > > it's a ...
> > > > > > disaster.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you mean "a disaster" I just used the
> > > > workbench with
> > > > > 2.4-alpha4 and it
> > > > > seems to work OK (the images are missing
> > though...
> > > > is this
> > > > > what you mean?).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Where do you define components, pages etc. ?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm pretty sure that you can follow the same
> > > > method used in
> > > > > Tapestry2.3.
> > > >
> > > > Tapestry 2.4 is all about lowering the bar for
> development. You
> > > > don't need an application specification. You don't need to
> > > > pre-define pages and
> > > > components ... Tapestry will find them (in
> > WEB-INF)
> > > > for you. HTML templates
> > > > live in the context root (so that, among other
> > > > things, relative URLs to
> > > > images and stylesheets work properly while
> > > > editting).
> > > >
> > > > You can still build apps exacty as you did in
> > 2.3,
> > > > but you don't want to. I
> > > > don't even want to.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Has all this changed in a point release?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You are new around here... aren't you? :-)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > This should have been called 3.0!!!
> > > >
> > > > The major release number (the 2 in "2.4") is
> > > > unlikely to ever change, short
> > > > of Tapestry being translated to a new language
> > (say,
> > > > C# or Ruby). Don't
> > > > hold your breath.
> > > >
> > > > This is a big change though; much of the
> > internals
> > > > have been refined and
> > > > changed significantly. Byte code enhancement
> > for
> > > > declarative properties and
> > > > parameters, for a starter. Change in license,
> > > > change in package names.
> > > > This is why 2.3 is so similar to 2.2, because
> > 2.4 is
> > > > a big leap forward.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The workbench and Vlib examples are
> > disjointed
> > > > with
> > > > > > files all over the place.
> > > >
> > > > The number one complaint about Tapestry was that
> > the
> > > > HTML files were in the
> > > > classpath, which didn't make sense to most
> > people.
> > > > You can still do it that
> > > > way, if you want, but now specs go in WEB-INF
> > and
> > > > templates in the root, and
> > > > classes ... where they've always been.
> > > >
> > > > The page specification is now a lot less
> > important;
> > > > you don't constantly
> > > > have to edit it, the HTML template and the Java
> > > > class. Most of your time is
> > > > spent in the HTML template, with a little time
> > in
> > > > the Java class.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the point trying to be illustrated is
> > that
> > > > now
> > > > > Tapestry is more
> > > > > flexible in regards to were the files can be
> > > > stored.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Frankly, I am disappointed.
> > > >
> > > > I'm hurt! :-)
> > > >
> > > > All of these changes are big improvements to
> > > > Tapestry. I've long maintained
> > > > that Tapestry is the most powerful Java web
> > > > framework (open source or not),
> > > > but it is now the easiest as well! Simpler than
> > > > JSP, CF, PHP, ASP, etc.
> > > > But all the power is still there, still way
> > there.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no need for feel that way,
> > Tapestry2.4 is
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
RE: 2.3 to 2.4 Migration Errors - Success
Posted by Stav <cc...@yahoo.com>.
Ok - got it up and running - thanks.
I will update Wiki accordingly.
--- "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
> It changed from <component-alias> to
> <component-type>.
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
> http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stav [mailto:cclunis@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 7:11 AM
> > To: Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > Subject: RE: 2.3 to 2.4 Migration Errors
> >
> >
> > Those were easy fixes.
> >
> > I have done that already. The error I got was with
> > regard to specifying of the component-alias in the
> > application spec.
> >
> > Apparently this has changed. Where or how do you
> now
> > specify components?
> >
> > --- "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>
> wrote:
> > > Backwards compatibility is still there. What's
> > > probabably messing you up is
> > > minor issues, such as the prefix
> "net.sf.tapestry"
> > > being changed to
> > > "org.apache.tapestry" on key configuration
> values in
> > > web.xml.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > > Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
> > > http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Stav [mailto:cclunis@yahoo.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 8:04 PM
> > > > To: Tapestry users
> > > > Subject: RE: 2.3 to 2.4 I am LOST!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Howard,
> > > >
> > > > I am trying to migrate my 2.3 app to 2.4.
> > > >
> > > > I don't want to re-arrange anything. I like
> and
> > > need
> > > > the component-ized nature of Tapestry as a
> whole.
> > > >
> > > > For example I can provide my client with a jar
> and
> > > > some basic classpath and config settings and
> my
> > > > Tapestry based component can be plugged in to
> > > almost
> > > > any existing web app to add functionality
> without
> > re-inventing the
> > > > wheel.
> > > >
> > > > I guess what I am trying to say is that I was
> > > hoping
> > > > for a more seamless upgrade path and backward
> compatibility.
> > > >
> > > > I know that I may have over-reacted somewhat -
> end
> > > of
> > > > day and I am tired, I apologize :o)
> > > >
> > > > Flexibility is good but I hope that Tapestry
> does
> > > not
> > > > sell it's soul to applease the JSP fans.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 2 cents.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Stav.
> > > >
> > > > --- "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Luis Neves
> [mailto:lneves@netcabo.pt]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:18 PM
> > > > > > To: Tapestry users; Stav
> > > > > > Subject: Re: 2.3 to 2.4 I am LOST!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wednesday 12 March 2003 22:51, Stav
> wrote:
> > > > > > > I don't know what the hell happen in 2.3
> to
> > > 2.4
> > > > > ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Easy answer: A lot :-)
> > > > > > For an overview of what changed check the
> > > "What's
> > > > > new" page
> > > > > > at the web site
> <http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry>
> > > > > /new_frame.html>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just wanted to test out the Palette and
> > > > > > it's a ...
> > > > > > > disaster.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you mean "a disaster" I just used
> the
> > > > > workbench with
> > > > > > 2.4-alpha4 and it
> > > > > > seems to work OK (the images are missing
> > > though...
> > > > > is this
> > > > > > what you mean?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Where do you define components, pages
> etc. ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm pretty sure that you can follow the
> same
> > > > > method used in
> > > > > > Tapestry2.3.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tapestry 2.4 is all about lowering the bar
> for
> > development. You
> > > > > don't need an application specification.
> You don't need to
> > > > > pre-define pages and
> > > > > components ... Tapestry will find them (in
> > > WEB-INF)
> > > > > for you. HTML templates
> > > > > live in the context root (so that, among
> other
> > > > > things, relative URLs to
> > > > > images and stylesheets work properly while
> > > > > editting).
> > > > >
> > > > > You can still build apps exacty as you did
> in
> > > 2.3,
> > > > > but you don't want to. I
> > > > > don't even want to.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has all this changed in a point release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are new around here... aren't you? :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > This should have been called 3.0!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > The major release number (the 2 in "2.4") is
> > > > > unlikely to ever change, short
> > > > > of Tapestry being translated to a new
> language
> > > (say,
> > > > > C# or Ruby). Don't
> > > > > hold your breath.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a big change though; much of the
> > > internals
> > > > > have been refined and
> > > > > changed significantly. Byte code
> enhancement
> > > for
> > > > > declarative properties and
> > > > > parameters, for a starter. Change in
> license,
> > > > > change in package names.
> > > > > This is why 2.3 is so similar to 2.2,
> because
> > > 2.4 is
> > > > > a big leap forward.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com