I don't think that this model will work for tapestry. Clojure is kind of a "deal breaker". It's unique in what it does. Tapestry is "just" one of many web frameworks and I guess you wont reach the critical mass of contributors to make a living out of it.
Regards, Markus On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:56 AM, ARD Marx Tobias <tobias.marx...@daserste.de> wrote: > You need the marketing of RubyOnRails for Tapestry - combined with a good IDE > and "plugins" for common use-cases (e.g. authentication)...then more people > might > use Tapestry and the number of user-contribution rises. > > The best webframework is not very useful without a big community behind it. > Or: Even bad frameworks become useful if there is a big community behind it > as most frameworks and software live of user-contributed code. > > http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/cakephp.org > http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/rubyonrails.org > > http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/joomla.org > http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/drupal.org > > Also, from a business point of view, the bigger the market, the more > attractive > as specific framework...so there is many factors why "marketing" a framework > should not be underestimated. > > Just my 2 cents... > > Tobias > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Howard [mailto:hls...@gmail.com] > Gesendet: Monday, February 22, 2010 7:15 PM > An: users@tapestry.apache.org > Betreff: [Tapestry Central] March of Progress > > Or should that be "Late February of Progress". I have to say I'm a bit > envious right now of Rich Hickey ... I can see that he's continuing on > like a steam roller, extending and improving Clojure. I guess he's > having some success in generating Research and Design budget from > funding companies. I can see, following his threads, that he's working > on yet more concurrency metaphors for Clojure, which is a good thing > (though eventually there'll need to be a big book just to describe them > all). > I'm on a different track, in that I fund Tapestry out of pocket while > doing training and project work. In some cases, those merge, such as > when I add specific features to Tapestry for a specific client. > I'm of two minds here: doing project work keeps me grounded in real > requirements for Tapestry. I see what works really well, and what needs > some polishing. On the other hand, I come up with ideas for new > components, improvements, and integrations all the time and barely have > enough free time (between clients, ordinary Tapestry maintenance, and > this special project) to even document my ideas, never mind implement, > test and distribute them. > So, should I set up a funding option like Rich's? Well, that wouldn't > help my current clients (I'm committed to getting their apps into > production), but it may change how I would look for future work. > > -- > Posted By Howard to Tapestry Central at 2/22/2010 10:15:00 AM > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
