On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:49:19 -0200, Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us>
wrote:
Yea, the first thing I heard about tapestry is that's it's good but
doesn't care about backwards compatibility.
I had clean-sheed design so I didn't care.
In this scenario I wouldn't too (I even convinced my bosses at the time to
use Tapestry 5 alphas), but many people do.
As you saw, I chose my words very carefully. 'favor' is the operative
word, not 'the hell with backwards compatibility'
Yep!
Isn't it true though that if you are relying on Prototype in your
Tapestry app, you aren't really relying on the public API?
I've never seen anywhere that Prototype is the public API for Tapestry.
Nor me. :) Prototype isn't part of the Tapestry API but Tapestry provides
it. One way of dealing with the backward compatibility issue here is to
provide a package that provides Prototype in such a way thet the $()
function is the Prototype one, not the jQuery one. Something like this was
suggested for deprecated APIs, such as the old URL rewriting API, which is
heavily used in the projects I work currently.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
and instructor
Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda.
http://www.arsmachina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
