I can't promise you a date; I think the code is largely stable and
very powerful (and fun) to develop with.  There's a lot of minor nits
and bugs that are getting fixed.  There's a LOT of missing
documentation that doesn't seem to be anyone's priority.  I've been
trying to delegate out all the work that doesn't absolutely have to be
done by me.

On 8/18/05, Mark Stang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howard,
> Great, how close is Tap 4 to being Production Ready?  Is it stable enough for 
> us to switch?  We are going GA on Novemeber 11.   And we have a month of QA 
> before that.  So, the question is, will Tap 4 be stable enough by then?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thu 8/18/2005 2:09 PM
> To: Tapestry development
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate the action service
> 
> I believe Tapestry 4's LinkSubmit will do it.
> 
> On 8/18/05, Mark Stang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Howard,
> > What is the recommended solution that will submit the form on a link and 
> > pass in an id?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thu 8/18/2005 9:47 AM
> > To: Tapestry development
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate the action service
> >
> > Use a DirectLink component, and pass the id of the invoice as a
> > listener parameter.
> >
> > On 8/18/05, Jonas Maurus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Howard Lewis Ship <hlship <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I just saw another spat of user problems related to use of the action
> > > > service. I say "use", not "misuse" because, in my opinion, it can't be
> > > > used correctly.  The clever tricks for maintaining client and server
> > > > synchronization that have evolved in Tapestry 2.x - 4.0 just aren't
> > > > possible with the action service.
> > > >
> > > > I would very much like to deprecate the action service and the
> > > > ActionLink component. Who out there is using it and why?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm currently using the ActionLink component a lot in all my projects 
> > > together
> > > with contrib:Table.
> > >
> > > The typical use-case looks something like this:
> > >
> > > Invoices.html
> > > [...]
> > > <td jwcid="viewLinkColumnValue">
> > >   <a jwcid="view" href="../viewers/InvoiceViewer.html">
> > >     <span key="list.viewinvoice">details</span>
> > >   </a>
> > > </td>
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > Invoices.page
> > > [...]
> > > <component id="invoiceTable" type="contrib:Table">
> > >   <binding name="source" value="invoiceList" />
> > >   <binding name="columns" 
> > > value="literal:id,subject,total,viewLink,editLink" />
> > >   <binding name="row" value="currentInvoice" />
> > > </component>
> > >
> > > <component id="view" type="ActionLink">
> > >   <binding name="listener" value="listener:viewInvoice" />
> > > </component>
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > Usually the ActionLink's listener then does something like this (Invoice 
> > > being a
> > > persistent property of InvoiceViewer):
> > > public IPage viewInvoice(IRequestCycle cycle) {
> > >   InvoiceViewer iv = 
> > > (InvoiceViewer)cycle.getPage("viewers/InvoiceViewer");
> > >   iv.setInvoice(getCurrentInvoice());
> > >   return iv;
> > > }
> > >
> > > This pattern comes from contrib:Table's documentation. At least, should
> > > ActionLink be removed, alternatives have to be documented well before 
> > > we're
> > > doing it, especially in places like contrib:Table, where the 
> > > documentation makes
> > > explicit use of this component.
> > >
> > > Still, I don't know enough about Tapestry's internals to know if it would 
> > > be a
> > > good decision, but in any way, if it happens, it should happen now. As 
> > > I've said
> > > before, it's better to make porting to 4.0 a major pain and support 3.0 a 
> > > little
> > > bit longer than making big changes between 4.0 and 4.1.
> > >
> > > How would you solve the above problem without using ActionLink?
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > > Jonas
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> > Creator, Jakarta 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]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> Creator, Jakarta 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]
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta 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]

Reply via email to