Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>]

Had a really cool time doing the Tapestry 5 spiel in Denver and
Boulder this week. Sure it cost me about $2000 in lost billable time,
but that's just how I roll.

Scott Davis had some very good ideas; he's a big proponent of Grails,
and he thinks the key is to offer a full stack; i.e., the archetype
includes some basic Hibernate entities, plus some scaffolding for
those entities, and Maven machinerty to start it all up and run Derby
or HSQLDB.  So, really, it would be nice if we had even more Trails
like behavior as part of the quickstart archetype, right from the
get-go.

I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
archetype for bare-bones).

Thoughts?

-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship
TWD Consulting, Inc.
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
Creator, Apache HiveMind

Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com

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

Re: Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[Daniel Jue <te...@gmail.com>]

I vote for both minimal and kitchen-sink examples.  When I was first
starting with Tapestry (and it was also my very first web app ever,
having never started with jsps, etc), the Tapestry Workbench was
overwhelming.  So many things were woven together that I couldn't pick
out the pieces easy enough.  Although, once I started learning more,
it was great to pick out pieces here and there.

I really appreciate the simplicity of the existing Tap 5 archetype.
It also makes it easy to start off your screencasts!

My preference would be a series of quickstarts that take care of "the
way Tapestry 5 does things", enough so that I can just referece a
Hibernate/etc book for the specifics.  And of course, a Advanced Core
archetype to show us the T5 core components running in captivity.

Tap 5 Quickstart  (could stay unchanged)
Tap 5 Advanced Core   (shows off all the core components, like the workbench)
Tap 5 Hibernate (simple like quickstart, that pulls from hibernate and
puts into a grid)
Tap 5 Spring (could be combined with above for Spring Configuration of
Hibernate?)
Tap 5 Acegi (simple like quickstart that has a login, error and post
login page, with an ASO for the user's details)
Tap 5 Ajax (quickstart using AJAX to selectively refresh the time / hi lo game)
etc

So the simple ones could just be spin offs of the current quickstart.

BTW
I am currently using Tapestry Hibernate and Derby (nothing complex
though) with no problems except the ones I've caused--like trying to
create table names that used a reserved keyword.  I'm also having
Tomcat handle the JNDI for it, although Hibernate could do it instead
IIRC.

On 6/18/07, Davor Hrg <hr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm for both minimal and maximal archetype,
> minimal for those who already know what they want and how to use it.
> maximal for those wanting to try or evaluate the framework.
>
> there definitely are users that haven't tried spring or hibernate
> (or had hibernate, but not hiberante annotations)
>
> many things can go wrong when you try a new framework,
> and inevitably try to do thing in way not meant to be done for that
> particular framework.
>
>
> Davor Hrg
>
> On 6/18/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/16/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
> > > to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
> > > archetype for bare-bones).
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > To me it seems obvious that this would be a win in T5 popularity, it
> > makes it more a rails-like framework and nowadays this is a top word
> > in the web app development, but i cannot evaluate the effort needed
> > achieving this.
> >
> > It's true that deleting thing is much easier then adding (at least in
> > the correct way) but having a bunch of stuff which you don't actually
> > need (hibernate or spring or upload or what else will come out) and
> > having to delete it without conscience can cause you the same trouble
> > as to have to add them. You've to know how it works.
> > T5 is already doing a great job in making it easy to add a 'feature',
> > just drop the jar in and you're fine, plus if the jar need some
> > configuration it needs for the external libraries it is integrating
> > within T5 not for itself, so basically it is the same of saying: Here
> > are you're needed libraries, configure as you wish. And it seems
> > obvious that if i want to use Hibernate or Spring or what else I've to
> > know how it works and how to configure it.
> >
> > That to say that the current behaviour of T5 modules with the doc is
> > enough for me, if the effort of building the "maximal template" could
> > be directed somewhere else ;)
> >
> > --
> > Massimo
> > http://meridio.blogspot.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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

Re: Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[Davor Hrg <hr...@gmail.com>]

I'm for both minimal and maximal archetype,
minimal for those who already know what they want and how to use it.
maximal for those wanting to try or evaluate the framework.

there definitely are users that haven't tried spring or hibernate
(or had hibernate, but not hiberante annotations)

many things can go wrong when you try a new framework,
and inevitably try to do thing in way not meant to be done for that
particular framework.


Davor Hrg

On 6/18/07, Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/16/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
> > to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
> > archetype for bare-bones).
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> To me it seems obvious that this would be a win in T5 popularity, it
> makes it more a rails-like framework and nowadays this is a top word
> in the web app development, but i cannot evaluate the effort needed
> achieving this.
>
> It's true that deleting thing is much easier then adding (at least in
> the correct way) but having a bunch of stuff which you don't actually
> need (hibernate or spring or upload or what else will come out) and
> having to delete it without conscience can cause you the same trouble
> as to have to add them. You've to know how it works.
> T5 is already doing a great job in making it easy to add a 'feature',
> just drop the jar in and you're fine, plus if the jar need some
> configuration it needs for the external libraries it is integrating
> within T5 not for itself, so basically it is the same of saying: Here
> are you're needed libraries, configure as you wish. And it seems
> obvious that if i want to use Hibernate or Spring or what else I've to
> know how it works and how to configure it.
>
> That to say that the current behaviour of T5 modules with the doc is
> enough for me, if the effort of building the "maximal template" could
> be directed somewhere else ;)
>
> --
> Massimo
> http://meridio.blogspot.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>

Re: Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>]

On 6/16/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
> to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
> archetype for bare-bones).
>
> Thoughts?

To me it seems obvious that this would be a win in T5 popularity, it
makes it more a rails-like framework and nowadays this is a top word
in the web app development, but i cannot evaluate the effort needed
achieving this.

It's true that deleting thing is much easier then adding (at least in
the correct way) but having a bunch of stuff which you don't actually
need (hibernate or spring or upload or what else will come out) and
having to delete it without conscience can cause you the same trouble
as to have to add them. You've to know how it works.
T5 is already doing a great job in making it easy to add a 'feature',
just drop the jar in and you're fine, plus if the jar need some
configuration it needs for the external libraries it is integrating
within T5 not for itself, so basically it is the same of saying: Here
are you're needed libraries, configure as you wish. And it seems
obvious that if i want to use Hibernate or Spring or what else I've to
know how it works and how to configure it.

That to say that the current behaviour of T5 modules with the doc is
enough for me, if the effort of building the "maximal template" could
be directed somewhere else ;)

-- 
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com

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

Re: Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>]

I like the idea of Grails support being supported.

If it's not too much of a PITA it might be easiest to consume if there were
a grails specific archetype.   I don't know how re-usable the archetype code
is if you want a common base though so....

On 6/16/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Had a really cool time doing the Tapestry 5 spiel in Denver and
> Boulder this week. Sure it cost me about $2000 in lost billable time,
> but that's just how I roll.
>
> Scott Davis had some very good ideas; he's a big proponent of Grails,
> and he thinks the key is to offer a full stack; i.e., the archetype
> includes some basic Hibernate entities, plus some scaffolding for
> those entities, and Maven machinerty to start it all up and run Derby
> or HSQLDB.  So, really, it would be nice if we had even more Trails
> like behavior as part of the quickstart archetype, right from the
> get-go.
>
> I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
> to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
> archetype for bare-bones).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> TWD Consulting, Inc.
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> Creator, Apache HiveMind
>
> Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Jesse Kuhnert
Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer

Open source based consulting work centered around
dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com

Re: Tapestry at Denver & Boulder JUGs

[D&J Gredler <dj...@gmail.com>]

I've had thoughts along the same lines. In general, it's much easier to
delete stuff than to add it correctly. Plus, if most people are going to
want the majority of the extras, it ends up being a win-win situation. I
think it would be a good idea to include a little of everything in the
archetype and just let people remove the bits they don't want.

On 6/16/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Had a really cool time doing the Tapestry 5 spiel in Denver and
> Boulder this week. Sure it cost me about $2000 in lost billable time,
> but that's just how I roll.
>
> Scott Davis had some very good ideas; he's a big proponent of Grails,
> and he thinks the key is to offer a full stack; i.e., the archetype
> includes some basic Hibernate entities, plus some scaffolding for
> those entities, and Maven machinerty to start it all up and run Derby
> or HSQLDB.  So, really, it would be nice if we had even more Trails
> like behavior as part of the quickstart archetype, right from the
> get-go.
>
> I'm beginning to learn towards the idea that quickstart should evolve
> to be the "maximal" Tapestry template (and perhaps we add a "minimal"
> archetype for bare-bones).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> TWD Consulting, Inc.
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> Creator, Apache HiveMind
>
> Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Daniel Gredler
http://daniel.gredler.net/