On Jul 12, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Alexander Spohr wrote: > We want to go the WO-way and are asking us how we can make that way bring us > into the future. > > You propose to switch to a different lane and have us all run into another > direction.
In the context of this discussion, I think Aaron's position is entirely valid. Why dump years into developing a replacement ORM for WO when new frameworks have shown that ORMs are entirely unnecessary? His specific suggestion of Seaside is up to the individual, but the core question is sound. > That is a totally different discussion. We don’t want to change our way of > programming, we just want the core to be open, extendable and fixable. To me, WO is those things already. It's free forever. I can decompile and fix whatever I need. This has been standard practice in Wonder for years. You want to know the biggest unfixable problem with WO for me? WO apps can't be deployed on any mobile platform. That really sucks. If I need an enterprise class server that can handle serious load on server hardware though, I'm probably going to stick with WO for a while longer. I haven't seen anything in that space which is more compelling. It is what it is. Ramsey _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
