My components are not generic enough. They are product specific.
-----Original Message----- From: Darío Vasconcelos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 8/5/2005 5:58 PM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Component Abuse Since everybody is building components so easily, why are the Tapestry repositories (Tacos, Tassel, t-deli, etc) kind of empty? Licensing issues? Components that are not generic enough? Lack of time? Fear of finding too many newbies asking basic questions (contrib:Table comes to my mind)? I guess all of you agree that a diverse and heavily populated component library would be a good thing for TP... In my case, I'm still a newbie, and I still haven't build a killer component that might be useful for people other than me. Regards, Dario On 8/5/05, Mark Stang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I only have one page, so everything is a component. In general, I create new > ones until I see they overlap, then I refactor them into one. If I have a > component that already does pretty much what I need, I may add "conditionals" > to be able to reuse. If the component is generic enough then it can be > reused in many places. However, once it starts having internal business > logic, I break it out. Sometimes, I re-use the java class that maintains > state and put in a new .html/.jwc. It has the same behavior but different > look and feel. And since my components have a matching "state" class, I > reuse the entire component in many logic paths. I have a bunch of state > machines each of which can re-use a component, so my components end up being > re-used in many places. And sometimes my state machines call the same state > machine, so there is re-use there also. > > Occasionally, I will have a component that needs to be used by more than one > state machine, so I abstract out the methods that are common and the > components communicate with the state machine via interfaces. > > Occasionally, I run into issues with re-use where the logic and edits are > slightly different, then things get complicated ;-). > > regards, > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Menard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Fri 8/5/2005 5:26 PM > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: Component Abuse > > On Friday 05 August 2005 19:13, Robert Zeigler wrote: > > > My point was simply that, just because you can't reuse the component > > across multiple projects doesn't mean it shouldn't be a component. :) > > (Or, there's nothing wrong with application-specific components. :) > > Ahh good, then we're in agreement :-) > > -- > Kevin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- Hay dos tipos de mujeres: las bonitas y las que se pintan. - Enrique Jardiel Poncela --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
