I would hardly call it (Spindle) a RAD tool. It does very little. You are better off just using a plain editor. I have looked at Tapestry and I have the following impressions:
1. It is more difficult to figure out than Turbine. Although, it seems to have better docs. 2. The servlet initialization takes very long. 3. It does not have a lot of the services that Turbine provides. 4. Other frameworks similar in principle to Tapestry that may deserve a look are Jade and Barracuda. From my cursory investigation it looks like Jade is the one that is closer to the goal of providing a .NET like framework in the J2EE world for web applications. It has a real RAD tool that works within Dreamweaver or IDEA. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Turbine Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:19 AM Subject: RE: Tapestry > I meant Spindle. Currently it is more of a Wizard style, but there are > plans in the works for making it closer to a VisualBASIC style of creation > (not WYSIWYG, but closer, with component toolboxes, etc). > > -----Original Message----- > From: Derick Fernando [mailto:derick@;xenocex.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:14 PM > To: Turbine Users List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Tapestry > > > By the RAD based design tool, Did you mean the Spindle plug-in for eclipse? > Or is there another? > > Thanks, > Derick > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Adam Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Turbine Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 6:57 AM > Subject: RE: Tapestry > > > > The biggest time that you would want to use Tapestry over Turbine is when > > you need to deal with seperate Graphics / Web Design and Programming > > Departments. When our company looked at Tapestry, Struts, Turbine, etc. > We > > felt that the intermingling of JSP, HTML, Java, and Scripts would make it > > hard to deal with development in this kind of environment. When you put > > non-HTML code into a HTML file, or non-Java into a Java file, you > introduce > > the potential of someone who does not understand one or the other, > damaging > > the work of one who does. In Tapestry, HTML is HTML and Java is Java. > Our > > graphics designers can create a complete website sans functionality or > > dynamic content, we can take the result, add dynamic content, and still > give > > it back to them to completely redesign with minimal work on our part to > get > > the new look working (usually it is simply verifying that all the SPAN > tags > > are correct). > > > > Tapestry's main hurdle to development, most likely like Turbine et al, is > > the change in mind set required to deal with MVC. But it seemed easier to > > me to learn Tapestry than it was to deal with Turbine, Struts, etc. > (Mainly > > because Tapestry had a RAD based design tool and MUCH less configuration > > files). > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex McLintock [mailto:alex@;OWAL.co.uk] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 9:42 AM > > To: Turbine Users List > > Subject: Re: Tapestry > > > > > > I disagree. It is *not* adequately described. I have read all the Tapestry > > emails on that mailing list. > > > > People say it has a component model for building up websites, components > > are described in files, components can have actions, but most of the > > technical description talks about how it is different to struts. > > > > What I want to know from Turbine people is when might you want to use > > Tapestry instead of Turbine, and why. > > > > Alex > > > > At 23:05 21/10/02, you wrote: > > >On that different mailinglist it is pretty well described (also by > > >Turbine people iirc). the list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >and the archives can be found on nagoya.apache.org > > > > > >Mvgr, > > >Martin > > > > > >On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 21:25, Alex McLintock wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > On a different Apache mailing list there is some discussion about > > whether > > > > or not Tapestry ( http://tapestry.sourceforge.net/ ) should be allowed > > > into > > > > Apache. > > > > Putting that argument aside... Tapestry has been described as another > > > > alternative to JSP, and potentially nearer to Turbine than to Struts. > > > > > > > > Has any experienced Turbine developers looked at Tapestry? How does it > > > compare? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, > > > e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > > > > > Openweb Analysts Ltd, London. > > Software For Complex Websites http://www.OWAL.co.uk/ > > Open Source Software Companies please register here > > http://www.OWAL.co.uk/oss_support/ > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
