[ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
Hello, everyone!

Today the team released Tapestry 5.4.4, a drop-in replacement for 5.4.x.

This is a recommended upgrade due to including one security improvement.

Bugs fixed
[TAP5-2582] - Service creation for Hibernate Session results in
ClassFormatError: Duplicate method name&signature
Improvements
[TAP5-2601] - Add configurable service to block access to classpath assets
[TAP5-2603] - Create HTML5-based date form field component

--
Thiago
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Cezary Biernacki
Thanks. It is good to see a new release.

Best regards,
Cezary


On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 7:13 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello, everyone!
>
> Today the team released Tapestry 5.4.4, a drop-in replacement for 5.4.x.
>
> This is a recommended upgrade due to including one security improvement.
>
> Bugs fixed
> [TAP5-2582] - Service creation for Hibernate Session results in
> ClassFormatError: Duplicate method name&signature
> Improvements
> [TAP5-2601] - Add configurable service to block access to classpath assets
> [TAP5-2603] - Create HTML5-based date form field component
>
> --
> Thiago
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
You're welcome!

Tapestry 5.5, supporting Java 11, will be released in the next couple
months at most.

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:54 PM Cezary Biernacki <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Thanks. It is good to see a new release.
>
> Best regards,
> Cezary
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 7:13 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello, everyone!
> >
> > Today the team released Tapestry 5.4.4, a drop-in replacement for 5.4.x.
> >
> > This is a recommended upgrade due to including one security improvement.
> >
> > Bugs fixed
> > [TAP5-2582] - Service creation for Hibernate Session results in
> > ClassFormatError: Duplicate method name&signature
> > Improvements
> > [TAP5-2601] - Add configurable service to block access to classpath
> assets
> > [TAP5-2603] - Create HTML5-based date form field component
> >
> > --
> > Thiago
> >
>


--
Thiago
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

JumpStart
Marvellous news! Thank you very much to all involved.

I’ll aim to bring JumpStart into line with it before the new year.

Geoff

> On 19 Dec 2018, at 7:15 am, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> You're welcome!
>
> Tapestry 5.5, supporting Java 11, will be released in the next couple
> months at most.
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:54 PM Cezary Biernacki <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks. It is good to see a new release.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Cezary
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 7:13 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, everyone!
>>>
>>> Today the team released Tapestry 5.4.4, a drop-in replacement for 5.4.x.
>>>
>>> This is a recommended upgrade due to including one security improvement.
>>>
>>> Bugs fixed
>>> [TAP5-2582] - Service creation for Hibernate Session results in
>>> ClassFormatError: Duplicate method name&signature
>>> Improvements
>>> [TAP5-2601] - Add configurable service to block access to classpath
>> assets
>>> [TAP5-2603] - Create HTML5-based date form field component
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thiago
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thiago


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Christopher
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
Good team effort!  It's encouraging to see Tapestry progressing in step
with associated technologies: Java 12 is due out in March, and Hibernate
currently at version 5.3.3.

Tapestry 5 was a leap forward from 4.  Where does the community see
Tapestry 6 at on the Java web landscape?  A free and frank conversation -
Tapestry's strengths and weaknesses, what attracts others to JSF, Wicket
and other competing frameworks, where web frameworks are generally headed,
etcetera - ought to help ensure that Tapestry remains relevant beyond
2020.

Regards,

Chris.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
Congratulations! Thanks to the core team for your continuous work and the effort you put into maintaining Tapestry.

I think the whole industry goes the way of trying to simplify things (just take a look at the most recent programming languages & frameworks). If we’re talking about modernizing and competing with other frameworks, I would like to see Tapestry reducing the complexity that is currently required to grasp the framework and its various concepts (which are technically great, but sometimes hard to understand if you just start working with Tapestry). I think this will only work by providing old & new APIs at the same time and by making the upgrade path and improvements very clear in the documentation.

Personally I’m also getting into the vibe of smaller services that communicate with each other, instead of this one monolithic giant that tries to be everything, but is nothing in the end. We use bootique-tapestry (and also other Bootique-compatible integrations). I would like to see Tapestry to also go in this direction and improve integration on similar deployment environments.

On the other side, I’m currently pretty happy with the state of Tapestry and with the framework keeping up with modern Java versions.

Best,
Rafael


> On 2018-19-12, at 11:02 AM, Christopher Dodunski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Good team effort!  It's encouraging to see Tapestry progressing in step
> with associated technologies: Java 12 is due out in March, and Hibernate
> currently at version 5.3.3.
>
> Tapestry 5 was a leap forward from 4.  Where does the community see
> Tapestry 6 at on the Java web landscape?  A free and frank conversation -
> Tapestry's strengths and weaknesses, what attracts others to JSF, Wicket
> and other competing frameworks, where web frameworks are generally headed,
> etcetera - ought to help ensure that Tapestry remains relevant beyond
> 2020.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Carlos Montero Canabal
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
Great news and great work Tapestry Team!

El mié., 19 dic. 2018 a las 0:15, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo (<
[hidden email]>) escribió:

> You're welcome!
>
> Tapestry 5.5, supporting Java 11, will be released in the next couple
> months at most.
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:54 PM Cezary Biernacki <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks. It is good to see a new release.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Cezary
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 7:13 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, everyone!
> > >
> > > Today the team released Tapestry 5.4.4, a drop-in replacement for
> 5.4.x.
> > >
> > > This is a recommended upgrade due to including one security
> improvement.
> > >
> > > Bugs fixed
> > > [TAP5-2582] - Service creation for Hibernate Session results in
> > > ClassFormatError: Duplicate method name&signature
> > > Improvements
> > > [TAP5-2601] - Add configurable service to block access to classpath
> > assets
> > > [TAP5-2603] - Create HTML5-based date form field component
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thiago
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Thiago
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
In reply to this post by chiefsucker
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:41 AM Rafael Bugajewski <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Congratulations! Thanks to the core team for your continuous work and the
> effort you put into maintaining Tapestry.
>

Thanks!


> I think the whole industry goes the way of trying to simplify things (just
> take a look at the most recent programming languages & frameworks). If
> we’re talking about modernizing and competing with other frameworks, I
> would like to see Tapestry reducing the complexity that is currently
> required to grasp the framework and its various concepts (which are
> technically great, but sometimes hard to understand if you just start
> working with Tapestry). I think this will only work by providing old & new
> APIs at the same time and by making the upgrade path and improvements very
> clear in the documentation.
>

Well, some stuff is indeed not simple, and I'd say the form support is the
part which could use some new components to make at least the simpler
scenarios simpler to implement (for example, when there are no loops).
Which other areas do you think could or should be simplified?


> Personally I’m also getting into the vibe of smaller services that
> communicate with each other, instead of this one monolithic giant that
> tries to be everything, but is nothing in the end. We use bootique-tapestry
> (and also other Bootique-compatible integrations). I would like to see
> Tapestry to also go in this direction and improve integration on similar
> deployment environments.
>

We could definitely have some ideas to make microservices easier to build
on the top of Tapestry-IoC.


> On the other side, I’m currently pretty happy with the state of Tapestry
> and with the framework keeping up with modern Java versions.
>

Thanks!

--
Thiago
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Chris Poulsen
Hi

Nice work on moving tapestry forward! It looks like the JDK updates may
just land, before we can't postpone updating our stuff anymore *fingers
crossed* ;)

There are still something fishy in the property access / generics support
implementation, I reported it some years back either on the list or in
jira, but it never got much attention. I do not know if this will get more
apparent as tapestry move towards newer runtimes.

We are using some pretty complex data models with deep interface
hierarchies and generics, and I ended up replacing the internals of
GenericsUtils with calls to com.google.common.reflect.TypeToken (Guava) to
get correct behavior (often tapestry would complain that some "setter" was
not found or similar because it resolved the type to something higher in
the interface/object hierarchy and missed the correct method override due
to typing or something else. (I spent some time on attempting to fix the
tapestry implementation, but ended up thinking it was a waste of time
trying to replicate functionality that was already coded (more correctly)
by other people, and picked guava as that was already present in our
dependencies).

Perhaps it is possible to find a lightweight,/focused library with a
compatible license today, that tapestry could rely on, instead of
attempting to implement this on its own.

This is obviously not a widespread problem, but it is one of correctness
and it tickles my OCD ;)

--
Chris

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:23 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:41 AM Rafael Bugajewski <
> [hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations! Thanks to the core team for your continuous work and the
> > effort you put into maintaining Tapestry.
> >
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> > I think the whole industry goes the way of trying to simplify things
> (just
> > take a look at the most recent programming languages & frameworks). If
> > we’re talking about modernizing and competing with other frameworks, I
> > would like to see Tapestry reducing the complexity that is currently
> > required to grasp the framework and its various concepts (which are
> > technically great, but sometimes hard to understand if you just start
> > working with Tapestry). I think this will only work by providing old &
> new
> > APIs at the same time and by making the upgrade path and improvements
> very
> > clear in the documentation.
> >
>
> Well, some stuff is indeed not simple, and I'd say the form support is the
> part which could use some new components to make at least the simpler
> scenarios simpler to implement (for example, when there are no loops).
> Which other areas do you think could or should be simplified?
>
>
> > Personally I’m also getting into the vibe of smaller services that
> > communicate with each other, instead of this one monolithic giant that
> > tries to be everything, but is nothing in the end. We use
> bootique-tapestry
> > (and also other Bootique-compatible integrations). I would like to see
> > Tapestry to also go in this direction and improve integration on similar
> > deployment environments.
> >
>
> We could definitely have some ideas to make microservices easier to build
> on the top of Tapestry-IoC.
>
>
> > On the other side, I’m currently pretty happy with the state of Tapestry
> > and with the framework keeping up with modern Java versions.
> >
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Thiago
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
> On 2018-19-12, at 02:26 PM, Chris Poulsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Perhaps it is possible to find a lightweight,/focused library with a
> compatible license today, that tapestry could rely on, instead of
> attempting to implement this on its own.

I pretty much like this idea in practice. What I mean generally speaking: If there are bigger or more complex parts in Tapestry’s codebase that need a lot of effort to modernize or fix some smaller niggling issues, I would prefer to use a small library as a dependency if other people already implemented and solved the same problems. If we’ll find out in the future that the small dependency isn’t actually necessary, because we use even less parts from this library, we still can implement an alternative, more lightweight version.

> This is obviously not a widespread problem, but it is one of correctness
> and it tickles my OCD ;)

I don’t think Tapestry has widespread problems at all, and the one huge problem, namely Java compatibility, is already worked on. That said, I feel you and the small OCD demon inside ;)

Best,
Rafael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
> On 2018-19-12, at 01:23 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Well, some stuff is indeed not simple, and I'd say the form support is the
> part which could use some new components to make at least the simpler
> scenarios simpler to implement (for example, when there are no loops).
> Which other areas do you think could or should be simplified?

The one thing that comes straight up from my head is the current complexity / pipeline necessary for generating output. A couple of months ago I wanted to generate valid AMP pages within Tapestry. After one day of research and a non-working proof of concept, I decided to use the Play framework for this small customer and it worked right away. Tapestry does some processing (necessary for other parts of the framework, AFAIK) that makes it hard to generate valid AMP pages. I would really love to use Tapestry here, and I don’t think it’s out of scope for the framework.

Best,
Rafael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:03 PM Rafael Bugajewski <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> The one thing that comes straight up from my head is the current
> complexity / pipeline necessary for generating output. A couple of months
> ago I wanted to generate valid AMP pages within Tapestry. After one day of
> research and a non-working proof of concept, I decided to use the Play
> framework for this small customer and it worked right away. Tapestry does
> some processing (necessary for other parts of the framework, AFAIK) that
> makes it hard to generate valid AMP pages. I would really love to use
> Tapestry here, and I don’t think it’s out of scope for the framework.
>

What issue, exactly? Exact HTML output? If yes, this is something that
probably can be either fixed in Tapestry itself or customized implementing
a MarkupRenderer.


>
> Best,
> Rafael
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
Thiago
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Carlos Montero Canabal
In reply to this post by chiefsucker
I'm serving AMP pages with Tapestry (
https://elcocinerocasero.com/amp/receta/tortilla-de-patata ). I hope to
upload an example to http://tapestry5.dev-util.com/ this weekend with the
workaround to do it... But yes, AMP and XHTML aren´t good friends...

El mié., 19 dic. 2018 a las 17:03, Rafael Bugajewski (<
[hidden email]>) escribió:

> > On 2018-19-12, at 01:23 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Well, some stuff is indeed not simple, and I'd say the form support is
> the
> > part which could use some new components to make at least the simpler
> > scenarios simpler to implement (for example, when there are no loops).
> > Which other areas do you think could or should be simplified?
>
> The one thing that comes straight up from my head is the current
> complexity / pipeline necessary for generating output. A couple of months
> ago I wanted to generate valid AMP pages within Tapestry. After one day of
> research and a non-working proof of concept, I decided to use the Play
> framework for this small customer and it worked right away. Tapestry does
> some processing (necessary for other parts of the framework, AFAIK) that
> makes it hard to generate valid AMP pages. I would really love to use
> Tapestry here, and I don’t think it’s out of scope for the framework.
>
> Best,
> Rafael
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Numa Schmeder-5
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
Hello,

I kind of agree with Rafael. I would really like to see tapestry core having no css or JS framework dependencies at all, server side only validation etc…
And a pluggable architecture where you can add bootstrap compatibility os JS frameworks or form client side validation etc…

The ability to start with a blank page, nothing in it added by Tapestry, and then the ability to progressively add stuff in the head or in the footer etc.. I don’t always want tapestry to render doctype or head tag etc…

I know you can change everything by contributing configurations, but most of the time I need to remove/override contributions. I don’t want bootstrap, I don’t want Jquery. I want a custom doctype, head etc…

Now the web development is more focused on the client, you write more JS than before, in the typical setup you would use webpack to compress js and minify scss, web components with React, Amber etc... With Tapestry you need to understand the internals to know what to remove or to add.

Forms could be simplified, it’s one of the most complex Tapestry concept, because all other concepts are very straight forward and easy to grab.

Form validation should always be expressed as simple data attributes per field or globally at the form tag level (that’s partially like this). Then you can contribute or mixin any type of validators or use custom js to parse your form. This would work great with loops, partial form or dynamic form rendering should be improved.

Some other areas could also be simplified like links, activation context etc… Most of the people I explain tapestry to never understand why there are so many different types of links.
Users want a link to a page, that eventually calls a listener with parameters and most of the time they prefer named parameters. I think there should be only one type of link with configurable options and good default values (optional page name, optional listener name, optional named parameters etc…)

I would be very interested to hear Wicket users on why they prefer Wicket to Tapestry or which Wicket features they prefer.

From my experience JSF is mostly used because it’s supported by big vendors, and you can start from a blank page with minimal dependencies if needed.

Grails is pretty neat because it generates quite a lot of things for you, and it’s easy to use but it’s less powerful than tapestry in some aspects.
Play like Grails has a command line generator that builds most of the skeleton for you, you just need to fill the “placeholders”, they all borrow concepts from rails.

I think Tapestry is in between: in some aspects it includes too many features on others not enough. We should split tapestry in smaller pieces, and have a command line tool to generate all necessary parts of an application (web page, api/json endpoint, validator, type coercer, model etc..).
This has already been done in the past but that could be improved.

Just my two cents :)

Numa


> Le 19 déc. 2018 à 19:01, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:03 PM Rafael Bugajewski <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> The one thing that comes straight up from my head is the current
>> complexity / pipeline necessary for generating output. A couple of months
>> ago I wanted to generate valid AMP pages within Tapestry. After one day of
>> research and a non-working proof of concept, I decided to use the Play
>> framework for this small customer and it worked right away. Tapestry does
>> some processing (necessary for other parts of the framework, AFAIK) that
>> makes it hard to generate valid AMP pages. I would really love to use
>> Tapestry here, and I don’t think it’s out of scope for the framework.
>>
>
> What issue, exactly? Exact HTML output? If yes, this is something that
> probably can be either fixed in Tapestry itself or customized implementing
> a MarkupRenderer.
>
>
>>
>> Best,
>> Rafael
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
> --
> Thiago


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
> On 2018-19-12, at 07:01 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> What issue, exactly? Exact HTML output? If yes, this is something that
> probably can be either fixed in Tapestry itself or customized implementing
> a MarkupRenderer.

Yes, this basically boils down to Tapestry not modifying templates when I don’t want to. A couple of months ago I researched the topic and found a similar answer in the archives. I tried to create a lightweight class AmpWriterFactory that implements MarkupWriterFactory, but it was such a hassle for a relatively small project that I gave up. Maybe I was on the wrong path?

Rafael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
In reply to this post by Carlos Montero Canabal
> On 2018-19-12, at 07:32 PM, Carlos Montero Canabal <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'm serving AMP pages with Tapestry (
> https://elcocinerocasero.com/amp/receta/tortilla-de-patata ). I hope to
> upload an example to http://tapestry5.dev-util.com/ this weekend with the
> workaround to do it...

That’s great news, Carlos. Do you use a custom MarkupRenderer or did you choose another approach?

> But yes, AMP and XHTML aren´t good friends...

Yes, this is basically the main issue :)

Best,
Rafael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

David Taylor
In reply to this post by chiefsucker
It would be great to see a fresh vision and roadmap for Tapestry going
forward. Tapestry has many strengths, but has a relatively steep
learning curve and does not do enough to help new developers get off the
ground. We have been using Tapestry for a very long time and still find
it challenging at times, especially when integrating Tapestry with newer
client-side technologies.

I saw your mention of bootique-tapestry and am curious how that is
working out? We briefly looked at bootique-tapestry, but decided to
create a module to integrate with Spring Boot instead. Spring Boot won
out mostly because of the breadth of what it has to offer and the large
user community.

There are still a few rough spots in our Spring Boot integration, but
the effort was very worthwhile. The combination of Gradle + Spring Boot
+ Tapestry is very powerful and greatly reduces the amount of
boilerplate needed to create a production ready application. The
integration with Spring Boot is surprisingly thin and the integration is
nearly seamless.

Anyone have a sense as to whether the community is interested in
pursuing a first-class Spring Boot integration?  I would be happy to
share what we have done if there is real interest in making it a proper
Tapestry feature. I don't think it would be a huge effort if some of the
core Tapestry developers were engaged in the process. Having a supported
integration with Spring Boot might bring much deserved attention and new
users to Tapestry.

Regards,
David

> Congratulations! Thanks to the core team for your continuous work and the effort you put into maintaining Tapestry.
>
> I think the whole industry goes the way of trying to simplify things (just take a look at the most recent programming languages & frameworks). If we’re talking about modernizing and competing with other frameworks, I would like to see Tapestry reducing the complexity that is currently required to grasp the framework and its various concepts (which are technically great, but sometimes hard to understand if you just start working with Tapestry). I think this will only work by providing old & new APIs at the same time and by making the upgrade path and improvements very clear in the documentation.
>
> Personally I’m also getting into the vibe of smaller services that communicate with each other, instead of this one monolithic giant that tries to be everything, but is nothing in the end. We use bootique-tapestry (and also other Bootique-compatible integrations). I would like to see Tapestry to also go in this direction and improve integration on similar deployment environments.
>
> On the other side, I’m currently pretty happy with the state of Tapestry and with the framework keeping up with modern Java versions.
>
> Best,
> Rafael
>
>
>> On 2018-19-12, at 11:02 AM, Christopher Dodunski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Good team effort!  It's encouraging to see Tapestry progressing in step
>> with associated technologies: Java 12 is due out in March, and Hibernate
>> currently at version 5.3.3.
>>
>> Tapestry 5 was a leap forward from 4.  Where does the community see
>> Tapestry 6 at on the Java web landscape?  A free and frank conversation -
>> Tapestry's strengths and weaknesses, what attracts others to JSF, Wicket
>> and other competing frameworks, where web frameworks are generally headed,
>> etcetera - ought to help ensure that Tapestry remains relevant beyond
>> 2020.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chris.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Christopher
In reply to this post by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
Hi all,

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing
left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de
Saint-Exupéry.

Winsome words from a once French aviator.  Perfecting Tapestry is unlikely
to be a simple matter of just culling code.  Still, it should be possible
to do the basic things easily, and Tapestry's reputedly steep learning
curve is a disincentive to newcomers.

Should simplification, then, be one of the declared objectives going forward?

Chris.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

chiefsucker
> On 2018-20-12, at 05:16 AM, Christopher Dodunski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Should simplification, then, be one of the declared objectives going forward?

I would appreciate this as one goal of the future roadmap.

Rafael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tapestry 5.4.4

Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
In reply to this post by Chris Poulsen
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:26 AM Chris Poulsen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> Hello!


> We are using some pretty complex data models with deep interface
> hierarchies and generics, and I ended up replacing the internals of
> GenericsUtils with calls to com.google.common.reflect.TypeToken (Guava) to
> get correct behavior


Would it be possible to share your GenericUtils implementation using Guava
with the Tapestry project? Also, what's the ticket you posted before? We
definitely want to fix it for the 5.5.0 release. I already got another
report of a similar problem from another person and it would be nice to
reuse your solution if possible.


> (often tapestry would complain that some "setter" was
> not found or similar because it resolved the type to something higher in
> the interface/object hierarchy and missed the correct method override due
> to typing or something else. (I spent some time on attempting to fix the
> tapestry implementation, but ended up thinking it was a waste of time
> trying to replicate functionality that was already coded (more correctly)
> by other people, and picked guava as that was already present in our
> dependencies).
>
> Perhaps it is possible to find a lightweight,/focused library with a
> compatible license today, that tapestry could rely on, instead of
> attempting to implement this on its own.
>
> This is obviously not a widespread problem, but it is one of correctness
> and it tickles my OCD ;)
>
> --
> Chris
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 1:23 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:41 AM Rafael Bugajewski <
> > [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations! Thanks to the core team for your continuous work and
> the
> > > effort you put into maintaining Tapestry.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > > I think the whole industry goes the way of trying to simplify things
> > (just
> > > take a look at the most recent programming languages & frameworks). If
> > > we’re talking about modernizing and competing with other frameworks, I
> > > would like to see Tapestry reducing the complexity that is currently
> > > required to grasp the framework and its various concepts (which are
> > > technically great, but sometimes hard to understand if you just start
> > > working with Tapestry). I think this will only work by providing old &
> > new
> > > APIs at the same time and by making the upgrade path and improvements
> > very
> > > clear in the documentation.
> > >
> >
> > Well, some stuff is indeed not simple, and I'd say the form support is
> the
> > part which could use some new components to make at least the simpler
> > scenarios simpler to implement (for example, when there are no loops).
> > Which other areas do you think could or should be simplified?
> >
> >
> > > Personally I’m also getting into the vibe of smaller services that
> > > communicate with each other, instead of this one monolithic giant that
> > > tries to be everything, but is nothing in the end. We use
> > bootique-tapestry
> > > (and also other Bootique-compatible integrations). I would like to see
> > > Tapestry to also go in this direction and improve integration on
> similar
> > > deployment environments.
> > >
> >
> > We could definitely have some ideas to make microservices easier to build
> > on the top of Tapestry-IoC.
> >
> >
> > > On the other side, I’m currently pretty happy with the state of
> Tapestry
> > > and with the framework keeping up with modern Java versions.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --
> > Thiago
> >
>


--
Thiago
12