Yes. I've spent enough time investigating Click. It is not for me. Ricardo Lecheta said that it is simple/easy. No offense but I think the real term that should be used is "basic".
Thank you all for your opinions! On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Bob Schellink <[email protected]> wrote: > Like I said, Click is a stateless framework with stateful capabilities. > Sounds like your requirements is to be stateful with some stateless > capabilities? > > Sounds like Wicket is a better bet for your application. > > Kind regards > > Bob > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Daniel Ford <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> @Bob - Thanks for the links! >> I'm not sold on this approach. It is way too manual for my taste. >> >> @Dennis - I see what you meant with "less HTML to write". >> Looking at >> http://click.avoka.com/click-examples/source-viewer.htm?filename=WEB-INF/classes/org/apache/click/examples/page/table/SearchTablePage.javaone >> can see code like: >> >> editLink.setImageSrc("/assets/images/table-edit.png"); >> editLink.setTitle("Edit customer details"); >> editLink.setParameter("referrer", "/table/search-table.htm"); >> >> >> so you write your HTML in the Java file ... Not sold again. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Bob Schellink <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> There isn't much doco except for the javadoc: >>> >>> http://click.apache.org/docs/click-api/org/apache/click/Stateful.html >>> >>> >>> Here is an example: >>> http://click.avoka.com/click-examples/table/search-table.htm >>> >>> It is very basic and light-weight. A control can store and restore it's >>> state in the session. You could look at Table and ClickUtils on how it's >>> done. >>> >>> regards >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Daniel Ford < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Bob, >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Bob Schellink <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Daniel, >>>>> >>>>> Couple of years ago I've answered this question on StackOverflow: >>>>> >>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2168249/apache-wicket-vs-apache-click >>>>> >>>>> I think it the answer is still relevant today. One change is that >>>>> stateful pages have been deprecated in Click. Instead the notion of >>>>> stateful components was added. >>>>> We've found that stateful pages wasn't a good fit in Click. As can be >>>>> expected the conceptual model between a stateful and stateless page is >>>>> vast, almost like >>>>> coding in two different frameworks which is bad for maintenance. >>>>> Stateful components seems a better fit as one has fine control over what >>>>> and when to store state. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where I can read more about how stateful components work ? >>>> Since the page is not stored how a following http request finds the >>>> stateful component ? Where the component is stored ? Or maybe just its >>>> state is preserved at the client (cookie, request parameter, ...) ? >>>> I'll be thankful if you send me a link to a document or even to the >>>> code dealing with this logic. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I believe Click would be easier to learn and get going. With Wicket >>>>> one should be able to create more complicated UI's as all state is >>>>> preserved. Looking at the click-examples >>>>> should give a good idea of the type of applications one would normally >>>>> write with Click. As you can see it very web like, instead of desktop >>>>> like. >>>>> >>>>> Hope this helps. >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards >>>>> >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2013/09/10 22:40, Daniel Ford wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I noticed the mail about stopping development on Click. >>>>> >>>>> Can someone of you compare Click with Apache >>>>> Wicket<http://wicket.apache.org/>? >>>>> If you have experience with both frameworks I'll be glad to hear what >>>>> you believe Click does better than Wicket and what is better in Wicket. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you in advance! >>>>> >>>>> Daniel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
