I've never worked with Tapestry v3 but from what I've read about the history of Tapestry v4, the current Tapestry version has almost nothing to do with v4, so I guess v3 is completely different from how the current version behaves.
I'm sorry but I think you have a lot of typing to do :s...good luck. On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Parker, Chris@CDCR < chris.par...@cdcr.ca.gov> wrote: > Greetings all: > > I recently started to manage an application written by someone long gone, > after the application had sat unattended and unmanaged for ages. The > application is currently running on Java 4, Tomcat 5.0, and uses Tapestry > 3.0.1, running on 32bit Windows 2000 server. We'd like to upgrade the whole > system to 64bit Windows 2008 - and doing so requires all new services since > the current versions of Java and Tomcat do not support 64 bits. > > After a bit of thrashing with the various configuration files and > deprecated methods, I've mostly gotten Tomcat 7 to where it will start, with > the exception of the Tapestry entry in web.xml . web.xml has a stanza that > looks like this: > > <taglib> > <taglib-uri>http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/tld/tapestry_1_0.tld > </taglib-uri> > <taglib-location>/WEB-INF/lib/tapestry-3.0.1.jar</taglib-location> > </taglib> > > Tomcat starts up without complaint without that stanza (but of course the > application doesn't work), or it complains that "taglib definition not > consistent with specification version" with that stanza in. No doubt the > TLD inside the jar file does not meet with the new J2EE server > specification. > > > > I have never used or even touched Tapestry, although I'm otherwise > comfortable in Java. > > I'm concerned about upgrading to the latest tapestry version. Since this > application was written by someone else, I don't know if I know enough about > it to test all corners of the app to make sure his code is compatible with > an upgraded jar. Said another way, I don't yet know the business process > well enough to hit every corner of the application. > > Will the new version be backwards compatible with the code? Alternatively, > would it be reasonable to open the 3.0.1 jar file and modify the TLD? And > if that's possible, what should the new specification look like? I > especially don't know what the URL for the specification should be. > > Bottom line - what is my most reasonable course forward? > > -- > Chris Parker > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- *Regards,* *Muhammad Gelbana Java Developer*
