My bet is that Howard doesn't really know at the moment what would be entailed in migration from 4 -> 5 and ensuring backward compatibility (not the same thing). I should think that he threw out this comment because it is easier for him to think like this under the pressure of these new ideas, without having to cloud issues he confronts with, what may seem like, extraneous though very important concerns. But I don't think the community will allow such a radical disjunction between releases, it would seriously diminish the usefulness of the new release when there are so many existing projects that wouldn't be able to benefit from, or experiment with the new functionality. But my, very limited, understanding is that 5 is a very flexible framework, so I would expect that a lot of migration and compatibility issues would be able to be addressed. Just not now as it is too early in the process. Adam
On 28/07/06, Matt Welch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howard, if it really will be as difficult to move from Tap4 to Tap5 as you suggest, and if this new code base is indeed mostly new, perhaps it might be prudent to release what you are now calling Tapestry 5 as a new project instead; one that is "inspired" by the Tapestry concepts and intentions. Then Tapestry 4 could continued to be mainatained and if other contributers we re so inclined, it could be upgraded to a more "migration friendly" Tapestry 5. Personally, I don't have a problem with the migration difficulty as I dont' have any Tapestry 3 or 4 projects that I would upgrade. I built what I've built using the best options I had available at the time and while I continue to maintain some of those appliactions, I dont' feel a pressing need to upgrade them to the newest framework. I won't be upgrading them from Spring 1.2 to Spring 2.0 either. What's the big deal? As far as I'm concerned, there should be a migration path through all point releases, but any easy migration is just gravy. I for one am thrilled to see that Tap5 is dropping some of the encumberances of it's original implementaton. When I start a new project. I want it to be using the best tools out available. Here's to Tap5 and all it's incompatibilities! On 7/28/06, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Right now its impossible because there's nothing to convert to :-) > > It will be *VERY* difficult. This isn't a slap of new paint. Basic > paradigms are shifting around in a major way. It would be comparable, > or perhaps even larger than, converting between JSF and Tapestry 4. > Possibly on the order of converting from Struts to Tapestry 4. > > On 7/27/06, Norbert Sándor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I know that it's far away, but how easy/difficult will it be to convert > > an application from 4 to 5? > > > > Regards, > > Norbi > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
