Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Dan Simko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I didn't read whole conversation but you don't need to choose between
> Wicket and AngularJS. We are using both technologies together and it works
> great. AngularJS has no global state so you can use many Angular ("island"
>
That's exactly what the demo mentioned does: it creates a page where all
logic/AJAX is done via Angular and Wicket page just acts as a script
generating the page.
> single page) apps in one Wicket page. For some use-cases is better Wicket
so you use Wicket and for some (not so many) is better Angular, so you
> embed Angular app to Wicket page.
>
> Best regards,
> Dan Simko
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Martin Grigorov >wrote:
>
> > Make some noise about this (stupid) decision and when the higher
> management
> > realize the mistake they made they will ask you ;-)
> >
> > Martin Grigorov
> > Wicket Training and Consulting
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Richard W. Adams
> wrote:
> >
> > > Whether the reasons are valid or not irrelevant. I only passed along
> what
> > > I have heard; don't necessarily agree with the rationales. As I said, I
> > > was not consulted (and probably never will be).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Paul Bors
> > > To: "users@wicket.apache.org"
> > > Date: 01/03/2014 12:16 PM
> > > Subject:Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Both reasons provided don't carry much wight.
> > >
> > > 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases
> > > Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system
> > > administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k
> > public
> > > classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x
> > by
> > > myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one
> > by
> > > one.
> > >
> > > 2) Cost of tranning new developers
> > > Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes
> > > fast
> > > adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps
> the
> > > new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many
> > > books avaialble on Wicket, see:
> > > http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/
> > >
> > > I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so
> > > long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to
> work
> > > while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print
> the
> > > free guide via:
> > > http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html
> > >
> > > I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it
> looks
> > > like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can
> very
> > > easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to
> your
> > > upper management.
> > >
> > > Anyhow, that's my two cents.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process,
> but I
> > > > understand there were two main factors:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate
> > > > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from
> > > > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x.
> > > >
> > > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use
> > > > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years
> > > > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
> > > > To: users@wicket.apache.org
> > > > Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM
> > > > Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC
> > > over
> > > > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed
> > by
> > > > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Hi,
I didn't read whole conversation but you don't need to choose between
Wicket and AngularJS. We are using both technologies together and it works
great. AngularJS has no global state so you can use many Angular ("island"
single page) apps in one Wicket page. For some use-cases is better Wicket
so you use Wicket and for some (not so many) is better Angular, so you
embed Angular app to Wicket page.
Best regards,
Dan Simko
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Make some noise about this (stupid) decision and when the higher management
> realize the mistake they made they will ask you ;-)
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote:
>
> > Whether the reasons are valid or not irrelevant. I only passed along what
> > I have heard; don't necessarily agree with the rationales. As I said, I
> > was not consulted (and probably never will be).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Paul Bors
> > To: "users@wicket.apache.org"
> > Date: 01/03/2014 12:16 PM
> > Subject:Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> >
> >
> >
> > Both reasons provided don't carry much wight.
> >
> > 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases
> > Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system
> > administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k
> public
> > classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x
> by
> > myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one
> by
> > one.
> >
> > 2) Cost of tranning new developers
> > Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes
> > fast
> > adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps the
> > new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many
> > books avaialble on Wicket, see:
> > http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/
> >
> > I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so
> > long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to work
> > while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print the
> > free guide via:
> > http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html
> >
> > I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it looks
> > like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can very
> > easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to your
> > upper management.
> >
> > Anyhow, that's my two cents.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams
> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I
> > > understand there were two main factors:
> > >
> > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate
> > > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from
> > > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x.
> > >
> > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use
> > > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years
> > > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
> > > To: users@wicket.apache.org
> > > Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM
> > > Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC
> > over
> > > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed
> by
> > > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with
> > > productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that
> > > developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be
> > > completely
> > > productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative way.
> > The
> > > only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an
> > issue.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Ernesto
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > **
> > >
> > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is
> > > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended
> > recipient.
> > > Any use, review,
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Make some noise about this (stupid) decision and when the higher management realize the mistake they made they will ask you ;-) Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > Whether the reasons are valid or not irrelevant. I only passed along what > I have heard; don't necessarily agree with the rationales. As I said, I > was not consulted (and probably never will be). > > > > > From: Paul Bors > To: "users@wicket.apache.org" > Date: 01/03/2014 12:16 PM > Subject: Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC > > > > Both reasons provided don't carry much wight. > > 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases > Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system > administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k public > classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x by > myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one by > one. > > 2) Cost of tranning new developers > Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes > fast > adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps the > new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many > books avaialble on Wicket, see: > http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/ > > I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so > long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to work > while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print the > free guide via: > http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html > > I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it looks > like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can very > easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to your > upper management. > > Anyhow, that's my two cents. > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > > > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I > > understand there were two main factors: > > > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate > > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from > > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. > > > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use > > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years > > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. > > > > > > > > > > From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro > > To: users@wicket.apache.org > > Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM > > Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC > > > > > > > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC > over > > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed by > > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with > > productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that > > developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be > > completely > > productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative way. > The > > only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an > issue. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Ernesto > > > > > > > > ** > > > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is > > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended > recipient. > > Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by > others, > > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express > > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not > the > > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the > > e-mail and destroy all copies. > > ** > > > > > > ** > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. > Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the > e-mail and destroy all copies. > ** >
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Whether the reasons are valid or not irrelevant. I only passed along what I have heard; don't necessarily agree with the rationales. As I said, I was not consulted (and probably never will be). From: Paul Bors To: "users@wicket.apache.org" Date: 01/03/2014 12:16 PM Subject: Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC Both reasons provided don't carry much wight. 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k public classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x by myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one by one. 2) Cost of tranning new developers Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes fast adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps the new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many books avaialble on Wicket, see: http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/ I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to work while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print the free guide via: http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it looks like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can very easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to your upper management. Anyhow, that's my two cents. On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I > understand there were two main factors: > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. > > > > > From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro > To: users@wicket.apache.org > Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM > Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC > > > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC over > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed by > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with > productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that > developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be > completely > productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative way. The > only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an issue. > > Best regards, > > Ernesto > > > > ** > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. > Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the > e-mail and destroy all copies. > ** > ** This email and any attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the e-mail and destroy all copies. **
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Hi, On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > As to "How was it difficult?" Don't know. Nothing official came out. I'm > so low on the food chain I don't have many details. All I know is what > leaks out through the grapevine. > Good luck then: in the worse case you will learn new technologies and gain experience on technologies that start to be "hot"
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
As to "How was it difficult?" Don't know. Nothing official came out. I'm so low on the food chain I don't have many details. All I know is what leaks out through the grapevine. In any case, whether the new frameworks will be better worse. I have no influence over what course the corporation takes. The high level architects & budgeteers have already decided our course, apparently. From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro To: users@wicket.apache.org Date: 01/03/2014 12:59 PM Subject: Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC Hi, On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I > understand there were two main factors: > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. > How was it difficult? > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. > IMHO this is not going to improve with Angular.SJ+ Spring MVC: its is going to be worse. 1-With wicket you might hire a very good wicket developer that creates the components / widgets you need and the rest of the team just use those components and be "shielded" form JavaScript and mostly just do "server side". With Angular you will need more developers covering the whole stack (sever side and client side). 2-You can also reuse code at a maximum and if you have a lot of applications/similar screen you can roll out "meta components" covering those use cases... Not sure you will be able to achieve the same so easily with Angular.JS + Spring MVC. As I mentioned before I was working last three weeks with an application built with Backbone.JS (similar to Angular but less high level) + Spring MVC. All the "complexities" of this application would be mostly trivial using wicket. One thing that stoke me the most if the non DRYNESS of development: you change one thing at a place and you have to manually hunt down in all layers how this trivial change will impact application. ** This email and any attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the e-mail and destroy all copies. **
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Hi, On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I > understand there were two main factors: > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. > How was it difficult? > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. > IMHO this is not going to improve with Angular.SJ+ Spring MVC: its is going to be worse. 1-With wicket you might hire a very good wicket developer that creates the components / widgets you need and the rest of the team just use those components and be "shielded" form JavaScript and mostly just do "server side". With Angular you will need more developers covering the whole stack (sever side and client side). 2-You can also reuse code at a maximum and if you have a lot of applications/similar screen you can roll out "meta components" covering those use cases... Not sure you will be able to achieve the same so easily with Angular.JS + Spring MVC. As I mentioned before I was working last three weeks with an application built with Backbone.JS (similar to Angular but less high level) + Spring MVC. All the "complexities" of this application would be mostly trivial using wicket. One thing that stoke me the most if the non DRYNESS of development: you change one thing at a place and you have to manually hunt down in all layers how this trivial change will impact application.
Re: Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
Both reasons provided don't carry much wight. 1) Dificulty of maintanance/upgrading between major releases Our webapp was our reporting tool which morphed into a system administative tool currently with 54k lines of code in well over 1k public classes (conform Sonar). I migrated the webapp from Wicket 1.3.x to 6.x by myself in under 2 weeks simply by following the migration tutorials one by one. 2) Cost of tranning new developers Wicket itself is model much after the Java's Swing and it promotes fast adaptation for new developers (they teach Swing in college). Perhaps the new staff should consider spending 1 to 2 weeks reading one of the many books avaialble on Wicket, see: http://wicket.apache.org/learn/books/ I spent a good 3-4 weeks reading over Andreas' free guide whcih took so long because I was reading it a chpater a day on the subway ride to work while at the same time proof reading his new material. You can print the free guide via: http://wicket.apache.org/start/userguide.html I don't know AngualrJS too much as I never worked with it. To me it looks like another JS framework out there in the mixture of many that can very easily be integrated with Wicket. Perhaps you should suggest that to your upper management. Anyhow, that's my two cents. On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Richard W. Adams wrote: > I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I > understand there were two main factors: > > 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate > libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from > Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. > > 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use > Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years > experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. > > > > > From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro > To: users@wicket.apache.org > Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM > Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC > > > > May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC over > Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed by > client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with > productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that > developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be > completely > productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative way. The > only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an issue. > > Best regards, > > Ernesto > > > > ** > > This email and any attachments may contain information that is > confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. > Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, > and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express > permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the > e-mail and destroy all copies. > ** >
Rationale for Converting to AngularJS/Spring MVC
I don't have first hand knowledge of the decision making process, but I understand there were two main factors: 1. Difficulty in changing/maintaining the intermediate corporate libraries, especially when considering whether to make the leap from Wicket 1.4.17 to 6.x. 2. A perception of excessive cost in training new developers to use Wicket. I myself am fairly comfortable with Wicket now (after 2 years experience), but have to admit the leaning curve was pretty steep. From: Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro To: users@wicket.apache.org Date: 01/03/2014 10:58 AM Subject:Re: Converting Wicket to AngularJS/Spring MVC May I ask what was the rationale of choosing Angular JS + Spring MVC over Wicket? I have been using Backbone + Spring MVC in a project, imposed by client, for the last month and to be honest I'm not impressed with productivity you achieve using the combination: not to mention that developers need to know both JavaScript + Java server side to be completely productive. IMHO this will impact your productivity in a negative way. The only "reason" I could see to make that move is if scalability is an issue. Best regards, Ernesto ** This email and any attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the e-mail and destroy all copies. **
