That's good news Scott! You were actually pretty helpful yourself by thinking with us and providing good cases to answer.
Let's not forget b.t.w. that there is a lot of free-time sweat and tears sacrificed by the developers of MyFaces, tomahawk, etc, and that - even though JSF doesn't have my preference - I think it is still a better alternative than say Struts. But that said, I hope we'll see a lot of you and your team members around here and on the ##wicket channel, and I hope you still feel good about the choice a year from now (I know that I do :)) Eelco On 2/7/07, Scott Swank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, > > After closely considering Wicket and JSF my company has decided to go with > Wicket for our web development framework. This was based on a two week > prototype effort between two teams of four developers each. The Wicket team > made rapid progress and had extra time to add in unrequested features such > as i18n and JUnit tests, while still producing a clear, readable code base. > > This is to the credit of the core Wicket developers, particularly the ones > on this list who were so helpful in answering our questions. Thank you all. > Here are some of the issues that in my mind were material factors. > > 1. The wicket group made very rapid progress because > * the API is clean and easy to learn > * the examples are excellent > * things consistently work more or less as expected > > In comparison the JSF group had substantial upfront decisions to make before > progress could begin in earnest: > * use Sun's reference implementation or Apache MyFaces > * use Facelets or no > * which Ajax/DHTML framework integrates best with the above: ajax4jsf, > tomahawk, etc > > 2. Overall there was a preference for Wicket's Java components over JSF's > taglibs and backing bean code. This was not a unanimous preference, and > taglibs are much more concise than Wicket code. However, the cleanness of > the resulting HTML was a factor in Wicket's favor and the rapidity of the > development effort largely offset the comparative verbosity of the code > base. This verbosity was most evident in ajax form feedback: feedback > panel, text field, ajax feedback border, ajax behavior, etc. > > 3. The reuse of Wicket components was also in its favor. It is much easier > to create custom components via composition or inheritance in Wicket, the > palette is a great example of this. > > Thank you again for your patience and helpful answers. > > -- > Scott Swank > reformed mathematician > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job > easier. > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Wicket-user mailing list > Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier. Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
