Re: Tapestry
"Alejandro M. Ramallo" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.webobjects.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On May 22, 2005, at 1:20 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> On May 21, 2005, at 10:27 PM, Mark F. Murphy wrote:
>
>> At 3:38 PM -0300 5/21/05, Alejandro M. Ramallo wrote:
>>
>>> Today, after 3 years of development we are convinced that WOF is
>>> superior than Tapestry in terms of productivity and reuse (we
>>> came out with our own framework as you might suspect). In terms
>>> of what you can produce with each tool I am confident that they
>>> are both equally effective.
>>>
>>
>> I'm confused.
>>
>> You're convinced that WO is superior than Tapestry in terms of
>> productivity and reuse, but in terms of what you can produce with
>> each too you're confident they are both equally effective?
>>
>
> If anybody cares, here is my take on Tapestry ... fresh from a
> recent project. On a scale from "1" to "10" ("1" being JSP/Struts,
> "10" - WebObjects), Tapestry gets around "7".
>
> http://objectstyle.org/confluence/display/CAY/2005/05/22/
>
> Andrus
Thx Andrus!
In fact I am now recalling the internal discussions we had in our
team comparing Tapestry and WOF and the most important difference
that bothered us was the lack of a component state management.
cheers,
Alejandro M. Ramallo
IT & Relationship Management Director
Nobleza Piccardo S.A.I.C.yF. (BAT Group)
_______________________________________________
WebObjects-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-talk