> The Play Framework has the right idea:  stateless and restful.
> No clunky components and over-engineered objected-oriented baggage.
Play has some advantages but also shortcomings and presents significant
risks. The transition from version 1 to version 2 will require re-writing
the code. No migration possible! The new version seems to focus
on scala (the views are now coded in scala instead of groovy). The business
code can be in java and scala. What will happen to the java version in 2
years? Play's vision is a fully integrated technology stack with
fairly fixed choices (JPA data access for java, Anorm - single
layer over jdbc - for scala).

This is not the approach of wicket which is much more modular and
simply treat the presentation layer.

In short, there is no silver bullet ... just find the framework that best
meets your needs.

Reply via email to