Em Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:40:28 -0300, <kra...@k2d2.org> escreveu:
In fact, quite the contrary, it dissuades people who are evaluating Tapestry.
During Tapestry's long history, most people complained about the lack of backward compatibility. Some even chose to not use Tapestry because of that. It was the source of many negative comments and even trolls on this list.
Instead of defending your decision to make T5 with the cloak of eternal future compatibility, why don't you admit to your error and move on? A little humility would be of great benefit and would complement your intellectual prowess, which is self-evident in your works.
I see the situation in a different light: Howard had the humility to stop doing what he done four times (Tapestry backward-incompatible versions 2, 3, 4, and 5) and listened to the community, that wanted more stability. IMHO, the "no T6 ever" statement is more about saying that T5 was built from the ground up to be very flexible and to not need backward-incompatible changes to support new features. For example, I guess the whole AJAX, CSS (@IncludeStylesheet) and Javascript (@IncludeJavascriptLibrary) support could be removed and readded to T5 without changes in the public APIs. Of course, maybe Howard could have made it clearer.
-- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
