Re: wicket vs tapestry ? (Back Button Detection-Support)
On 8/23/07, William Hoover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Possible starting point for a client solution for back button > detection/support: > > http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2005/10/26/ajax-handling-bookmarks-and-back-button.html?page=1 Thanks for suggesting. We have discussed that and other articles a bunch of times already though. The problem we're having is not so much that we don't know how ajax back button support could work in the basics, but how it could work together with Wicket's server side state. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: wicket vs tapestry ? (Back Button Detection-Support)
Possible starting point for a client solution for back button detection/support: http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2005/10/26/ajax-handling-bookmarks-and-back-button.html?page=1 -Original Message- From: Matej Knopp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 6:30 PM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: wicket vs tapestry ? Hi, > 2) I like the back button support. My thinking is that extending Wicket's > AJAX integration to also support the back button (somehow) is a must. > Virtually everyone who uses Wicket will use it's AJAX functionality. Almost > all of these will need solve this problem. Sure would be nice if it was > included. There are plans to do this. However, it's a complicate problem that a simple solution won't cut. We have a server side part in place though. It's the javascript that needs to be extended, but our resources are too limited currently to do that. > 3) The design-by-inheritance model (WebPage, AbstractBehavior, etc). has > produced a somewhat fragmented library. Reminds me of the days of MFC. > T5's approach in this respect seems quite attractive. Would you mind elaborating on this a little? I kind of fail to see what's wrong with inheritance and why are people avoiding it like a plague nowadays. Is it really that much better to have your code annotated and called by reflection/bytecode generation? How discoverable such API is? How can you navigate such code? (forget call hierarchy). As a sidenote, I remember Igor building @OnBeforeRender like annotations, but he wasn't very happy with it and neither was I. -Matej > > Thanks for listening, > Erik > > On 8/22/07, Konstantin Ignatyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > My story: > > > > I have been very satisfied Tapestry 3 used and T3 has > > helped tremendously with building applications in the > > past. > > > > Then I was busy doing other things although keeping > > eye on T and recently I needed to build a live > > prototype quickly, naturally my first reaction was to > > pick up Dreamweaver and try Tapestry 5. > > > > T5 is amazingly good BUT I needed Ajax support and at > > this moment Wicket makes leaps and bounds around T5 in > > this area. > > > > So I abandoned T5 and started using Wicket - so far I > > am very satisfied with it although worry if Wicket is > > production grade for high traffic sites because of its > > heavy use of HttpSession as storage. > > > > So for now I will use Wicket for prototyping and small > > apps and keep my eye on T5. T4 is no-go for me - I am > > too lazy > > > > --- Chris Chiappone <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > A colleague of mine and I had a discussion about > > > this because he was > > > sorting through new frameworks to use for a new > > > project. I have been > > > using Tapestry since v3 and wanted him to give it a > > > try. Unfotunately > > > he ended up picking Wicket because of the fear that > > > Tapestry has > > > issues with backward compatibility. I am now > > > wondering if I made the > > > right choice in choosing tapestry for my > > > applications. He built his > > > application quickly and it is impressive using > > > Wickets built in AJAX > > > components. Upgrading in Tapestry has been a pain > > > going from 3 - 4 > > > and obviously 5 isn't even possible. I wish I could > > > have choose tap 5 > > > for my latest project but it was too beta and > > > doesn't play well with > > > other frameworks, ie a large legacy app with a > > > Struts like framework. > > > > > > Anyway its a hard decision, they both have plus' and > > > minus' > > > > > > ~chris > > > > > > On 8/22/07, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would say Tapestry 5 wins the challenge unless > > > you plane to use T4. > > > > > > > > Tapestry 5 uses annotations, and this is a very > > > important advanced feature > > > > in Java. You don't need to extend WOComponent, > > > WebPage or what ever. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think all frameworks will use the annotations in > > > the future; the question > > > > is when is available. > > > > > > > > T5 does and it's ready. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In ot
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
> > If you're interested, a contribution for the address book example with > > exPOJO/ JPOX would be more than welcome. > > Definitely, not a problem. When do you need it by? Whenever you feel like it. > Where can I find the spec for the address book app? No spec, only code :) https://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicket-phonebook It's phonebook, not addressbook btw. Sorry my wrong. :) Cheers, Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
On 8/22/07, Onno Scheffers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It's ok to be a control freak about it. But you should measure, not go > > by your hunch. :) > > > > You're right of course. > But since I'm currently learning, I can't help wondering at each step > where the data gets stored magically. there is about zero magic in this. the page object you create is stored in sessionstore. that means all the components and their fields are stored in sessionstore as well. page is just an object, and it is just put into the sessionstore - thats it - no magic. all components have a detach() callback before they are put into the sessionstore. they can implement that callback in order to shed some state that can be recreated in another request. components pass this call onto their models. this is an easy way to optimize state as you go. for example there is no need to store a fully loadded database bean, because instead you can just store its pk and later recreate the state of the bean by querying by pk. as far as failover goes, which is the reason you would replicate the session across the cluster, what wicket does is a bit unique. the default disksessionstore will save off pages onto disk and only keep the current page in httpsession. that means your session is small (only contains a single page per pagemap) and you have some failover support. failover will work fine as long as this doesnt happen: user accesses node A node A crashes users presses backbutton presses link gets page expired error this happens because only the current page is kept in session. you can also replicate the diskstore for full failover support, matej is working on that and i believe there is a project somewhere. this is only really needed for "dumb" container replication. if your servlet container is smart enough to only replicate a session attribute when it has been set instead of on every request you can do just fine with httpsessionstore imho. whenever a page is changed wicket will call sessionstore.setattribute on it, but only if it changed. -igor
RE: wicket vs tapestry ?
> On 8/22/07, Chris Colman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Eelco, > > > > I saw you mention Hibernate in the intro but I've been using JPOX with > > great success with Wicket also. You might want to mention that in the > > book or new comers might think Wicket is a Hibernate only framework. > > > > I use JPOX through the open source exPOJO (shameless plug! > > www.expojo.com) which is a light weight implementation of the "Exposed > > Domain Model Pattern" popularized in another Manning book, "POJOs in > > Action" by Chris Richardson. exPOJO also acts like an ORM agnostic layer > > over your chosen transparent persistence technology (currently supports > > JPOX and Hibernate) so that you can keep your code fairly independent of > > the underlying persistence library, allowing you to easily port from one > > to another to do performance comparisons etc., > > Hi Chris, > > We could definitively mention JPOX. Please help us not forget (we > still have to write the chapter on database driven apps) :) > > If you're interested, a contribution for the address book example with > exPOJO/ JPOX would be more than welcome. Definitely, not a problem. When do you need it by? Where can I find the spec for the address book app? > > Thanks, > > Eelco > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
> But since I'm currently learning, I can't help wondering at each step > where the data gets stored magically. Likely that will go away once I > know my way around Wicket. It's also not a complaint, just part of > getting to know the best way of doing things. I think it's a very good idea you have that in the back of your mind all the time. I hope it doesn't spoil the experience too much, and that you find Wicket's memory tradeoff acceptable. Cheers, Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
Unfortunately, that's an assumption that many people make. But say that you're not worried about optimizing and one session means about 100kb (on the high side, as with optimizing in my experience you should be able to bring that to 15-30kb)... That means you can support 10,000 concurrent sessions with one gig of RAM. If the application and VM don't use any memory themselves that is :o) I'm not that bothered about memory usage by the way. When a webapp is distributed over multiple servers, the session data needs to be serialized between the different servers. That's the main reason I try to keep as little data on the session as possible. It's ok to be a control freak about it. But you should measure, not go by your hunch. :) You're right of course. But since I'm currently learning, I can't help wondering at each step where the data gets stored magically. Likely that will go away once I know my way around Wicket. It's also not a complaint, just part of getting to know the best way of doing things. Best thing about both is that they are component oriented frameworks. Big improvement over model 2 frameworks imho. I fully agree :o) regards, Onno - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
> I personally feel more in control with Tapestry since every part of the > framework can be tweaked, overridden and enhanced easily once you know > your way around the framework Wicket can be tweaked in every imaginable way either, but some things are easier than others. > and you have full control of what objects are stored on the session Even that is true for Wicket (see ISessionStore), though you'll always have to deal with some overhead. > With Wicket I can quickly start developing pages but it feels like I > need to think much harder about how to do things without filling up the > Session with data, Unfortunately, that's an assumption that many people make. But say that you're not worried about optimizing and one session means about 100kb (on the high side, as with optimizing in my experience you should be able to bring that to 15-30kb)... That means you can support 10,000 concurrent sessions with one gig of RAM. I think if there is anything a bit more tricky with Wicket compared to other frameworks, it is bookmarkability. To the upside, everything you do with Wicket is safe by default. The downside is that it is not bookmarkable by default. > since it tries much harder to be smart for you behind > the scenes. It does this to make the developers more productive, but I > don't always trust that kind of smartness and I'm always afraid that any > List I'm showing gets stored on the session without me knowing about it. > I'm probably just a control-freak and this is just part of the Wicket > learning curve. I'm sure I'll feel more comfortable once I get to know > it better. It's ok to be a control freak about it. But you should measure, not go by your hunch. :) > That said, once you know Tapestry, it is very productive and really a > pleasure to use. As is Wicket from what I've seen so far. Best thing about both is that they are component oriented frameworks. Big improvement over model 2 frameworks imho. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
You can download the first chapter of Wicket In Action for free here: http://manning.com/dashorst/ and some chapters of Tapestry In Action here: http://manning.com/lewisship/ Actually, Tapestry in Action is pretty old and covers only Tapestry 3. I would advice downloading chapters 1-4 of 'Enjoying Web Development With Tapestry' (http://www.agileskills2.org/EWDT). This covers Tapestry 4. A lot of changes have been made from Tapestry 3 to Tapestry 4. I'm just starting to learn Wicket now and I can confirm that learning Wicket is easier that learning Tapestry. I'm sure others on this list can tell you a lot more about Wicket than I can. I personally feel more in control with Tapestry since every part of the framework can be tweaked, overridden and enhanced easily once you know your way around the framework and you have full control of what objects are stored on the session and when and you can let code inject pure html into the page wherever you like if you want to. With Wicket I can quickly start developing pages but it feels like I need to think much harder about how to do things without filling up the Session with data, since it tries much harder to be smart for you behind the scenes. It does this to make the developers more productive, but I don't always trust that kind of smartness and I'm always afraid that any List I'm showing gets stored on the session without me knowing about it. I'm probably just a control-freak and this is just part of the Wicket learning curve. I'm sure I'll feel more comfortable once I get to know it better. Some things I didn't like about Tapestry: Classes are abstract (a lot of stuff like getters/setters etc. are injected into the classes at runtime). It saves on boilerplate code, but makes testing harder and makes things less obvious. A lot of injections are done using either XML or Annotations with Strings of text in them. This doesn't give you any type-safety and forces you to continuously browse through the documentation. The learning curve is pretty steep (mainly because of the notorious rewind-phase that confuses a lot of developers) and it seems that every major release is incompatible with previous releases, forcing you to re-learn a lot. That said, once you know Tapestry, it is very productive and really a pleasure to use. As is Wicket from what I've seen so far. Regards, Onno - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
Hi, > 2) I like the back button support. My thinking is that extending Wicket's > AJAX integration to also support the back button (somehow) is a must. > Virtually everyone who uses Wicket will use it's AJAX functionality. Almost > all of these will need solve this problem. Sure would be nice if it was > included. There are plans to do this. However, it's a complicate problem that a simple solution won't cut. We have a server side part in place though. It's the javascript that needs to be extended, but our resources are too limited currently to do that. > 3) The design-by-inheritance model (WebPage, AbstractBehavior, etc). has > produced a somewhat fragmented library. Reminds me of the days of MFC. > T5's approach in this respect seems quite attractive. Would you mind elaborating on this a little? I kind of fail to see what's wrong with inheritance and why are people avoiding it like a plague nowadays. Is it really that much better to have your code annotated and called by reflection/bytecode generation? How discoverable such API is? How can you navigate such code? (forget call hierarchy). As a sidenote, I remember Igor building @OnBeforeRender like annotations, but he wasn't very happy with it and neither was I. -Matej > > Thanks for listening, > Erik > > On 8/22/07, Konstantin Ignatyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > My story: > > > > I have been very satisfied Tapestry 3 used and T3 has > > helped tremendously with building applications in the > > past. > > > > Then I was busy doing other things although keeping > > eye on T and recently I needed to build a live > > prototype quickly, naturally my first reaction was to > > pick up Dreamweaver and try Tapestry 5. > > > > T5 is amazingly good BUT I needed Ajax support and at > > this moment Wicket makes leaps and bounds around T5 in > > this area. > > > > So I abandoned T5 and started using Wicket - so far I > > am very satisfied with it although worry if Wicket is > > production grade for high traffic sites because of its > > heavy use of HttpSession as storage. > > > > So for now I will use Wicket for prototyping and small > > apps and keep my eye on T5. T4 is no-go for me - I am > > too lazy > > > > --- Chris Chiappone <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > A colleague of mine and I had a discussion about > > > this because he was > > > sorting through new frameworks to use for a new > > > project. I have been > > > using Tapestry since v3 and wanted him to give it a > > > try. Unfotunately > > > he ended up picking Wicket because of the fear that > > > Tapestry has > > > issues with backward compatibility. I am now > > > wondering if I made the > > > right choice in choosing tapestry for my > > > applications. He built his > > > application quickly and it is impressive using > > > Wickets built in AJAX > > > components. Upgrading in Tapestry has been a pain > > > going from 3 - 4 > > > and obviously 5 isn't even possible. I wish I could > > > have choose tap 5 > > > for my latest project but it was too beta and > > > doesn't play well with > > > other frameworks, ie a large legacy app with a > > > Struts like framework. > > > > > > Anyway its a hard decision, they both have plus' and > > > minus' > > > > > > ~chris > > > > > > On 8/22/07, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would say Tapestry 5 wins the challenge unless > > > you plane to use T4. > > > > > > > > Tapestry 5 uses annotations, and this is a very > > > important advanced feature > > > > in Java. You don't need to extend WOComponent, > > > WebPage or what ever. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think all frameworks will use the annotations in > > > the future; the question > > > > is when is available. > > > > > > > > T5 does and it's ready. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words, the real question you should ask > > > "Do I want to use > > > > annotations or classical framework?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Try T5 a little, and you will fast mention the > > > power of annotations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signature IT-Consult Armainak Sarkis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Alex Shneyderman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:13 AM > > > > Subject: wicket vs tapestry ? > > > > > > > > > > > > >I just started to look for a component based > > > framework. I came across > > > > > both tapestry and wicket (and it would be hard > > > not to as you guys > > > > > share the same host) but I kind of fail to see > > > what the differences > > > > > are? > > > > > > > > > > From my limited experiments with both, wicket > > > and tapestry seem to be > > > > > quite similar. So, I wonder if there is anything > > > I am not seeing? > > > > > Anyone has a comparisson map of wicket vs > > > tapestry? > > > > > > > > > > Alex. > > > > > > > > > > PS: I like both frameworks for their lightness I >
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
On 8/22/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You mean the wicket-phonebook? Yeah. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
You mean the wicket-phonebook? Martijn -- Wicket joins the Apache Software Foundation as Apache Wicket Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta2/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
On 8/22/07, Chris Colman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Eelco, > > I saw you mention Hibernate in the intro but I've been using JPOX with > great success with Wicket also. You might want to mention that in the > book or new comers might think Wicket is a Hibernate only framework. > > I use JPOX through the open source exPOJO (shameless plug! > www.expojo.com) which is a light weight implementation of the "Exposed > Domain Model Pattern" popularized in another Manning book, "POJOs in > Action" by Chris Richardson. exPOJO also acts like an ORM agnostic layer > over your chosen transparent persistence technology (currently supports > JPOX and Hibernate) so that you can keep your code fairly independent of > the underlying persistence library, allowing you to easily port from one > to another to do performance comparisons etc., Hi Chris, We could definitively mention JPOX. Please help us not forget (we still have to write the chapter on database driven apps) :) If you're interested, a contribution for the address book example with exPOJO/ JPOX would be more than welcome. Thanks, Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: wicket vs tapestry ?
Hi Eelco, I saw you mention Hibernate in the intro but I've been using JPOX with great success with Wicket also. You might want to mention that in the book or new comers might think Wicket is a Hibernate only framework. I use JPOX through the open source exPOJO (shameless plug! www.expojo.com) which is a light weight implementation of the "Exposed Domain Model Pattern" popularized in another Manning book, "POJOs in Action" by Chris Richardson. exPOJO also acts like an ORM agnostic layer over your chosen transparent persistence technology (currently supports JPOX and Hibernate) so that you can keep your code fairly independent of the underlying persistence library, allowing you to easily port from one to another to do performance comparisons etc., > -Original Message- > From: Eelco Hillenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2007 7:00 PM > To: users@wicket.apache.org > Subject: Re: wicket vs tapestry ? > > > Eelco Hillenius wrote: > > > You can download the first chapter of Wicket In Action for free here: > > > http://manning.com/dashorst/ and some chapters of Tapestry In Action > > > > > > > > Wow, Wicket In Action, we're all were waiting for it :-) > > Is this early access edition mature enough to buy or it's better to > wait? > > LOL. I don't know. If you buy early access, you'll get the updates > when they are available, so it doesn't really matter I think. We're > still waiting for Manning to put two more chapters online, and in the > background Martijn and I are working our asses of to get the rest of > the chapters done (which will still be at least a few weeks, but at > least there is stuff to get started, and that will only grow). > > Eelco > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
> Eelco Hillenius wrote: > > You can download the first chapter of Wicket In Action for free here: > > http://manning.com/dashorst/ and some chapters of Tapestry In Action > > > > > Wow, Wicket In Action, we're all were waiting for it :-) > Is this early access edition mature enough to buy or it's better to wait? LOL. I don't know. If you buy early access, you'll get the updates when they are available, so it doesn't really matter I think. We're still waiting for Manning to put two more chapters online, and in the background Martijn and I are working our asses of to get the rest of the chapters done (which will still be at least a few weeks, but at least there is stuff to get started, and that will only grow). Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
i think igor has some more info... On 8/22/07, Alex Shneyderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I just started to look for a component based framework. I came across > both tapestry and wicket (and it would be hard not to as you guys > share the same host) but I kind of fail to see what the differences > are? > > From my limited experiments with both, wicket and tapestry seem to be > quite similar. So, I wonder if there is anything I am not seeing? > Anyone has a comparisson map of wicket vs tapestry? > > Alex. > > PS: I like both frameworks for their lightness I just feel that I will > need to stick with one to be pragmatic :-( > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
Eelco Hillenius wrote: You can download the first chapter of Wicket In Action for free here: http://manning.com/dashorst/ and some chapters of Tapestry In Action Wow, Wicket In Action, we're all were waiting for it :-) Is this early access edition mature enough to buy or it's better to wait? -- Andrew Klochkov - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
Hi I have been using wicket for quite some time now. Prior to this I worked on tapestry for a short time . (In fact i implemented the same pages which i did in tapestry in wicket also) I may not be able to give you the right answer but i can definitely say this the learning curve in tapestry is quite high . Wicket is very easy to learn and especially easy to write ur own components But there is one important point i want to share. Whenever u choose a framework, it is very important to check how good the support is in the forums. That is biggest difference for me. Because even if framework is good, u r bound to run into issues. Just check out the wicket forum. The response time for a question is very less. Sometimes u will have more than one response. Thats makes a very BIG difference - atleast for me -swaroop
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
I don't know tapestry very well, but there's a page in the wiki with some information about the difference between the two frameworks: http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/for-tapestry-users.html Xavier On 8/22/07, Alex Shneyderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I just started to look for a component based framework. I came across > both tapestry and wicket (and it would be hard not to as you guys > share the same host) but I kind of fail to see what the differences > are? > > From my limited experiments with both, wicket and tapestry seem to be > quite similar. So, I wonder if there is anything I am not seeing? > Anyone has a comparisson map of wicket vs tapestry? > > Alex. > > PS: I like both frameworks for their lightness I just feel that I will > need to stick with one to be pragmatic :-( > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant http://xhab.blogspot.com/ http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ http://www.xoocode.org/
Re: wicket vs tapestry ?
On 8/22/07, Alex Shneyderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just started to look for a component based framework. I came across > both tapestry and wicket (and it would be hard not to as you guys > share the same host) but I kind of fail to see what the differences > are? > > From my limited experiments with both, wicket and tapestry seem to be > quite similar. So, I wonder if there is anything I am not seeing? > Anyone has a comparisson map of wicket vs tapestry? The best thing you can do is give them both a spin. They are quite different really; I'm sure you'll find that out once you code a few examples with them. You can download the first chapter of Wicket In Action for free here: http://manning.com/dashorst/ and some chapters of Tapestry In Action here: http://manning.com/lewisship/ Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
