On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:48:41 -0500 (EST), Andrus Adamchik
<andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> So they are being honest with their users... They must be new to the open
> source world :-)
I'll keep that to my fortune file :-D
>
> > From the user manual:
> >
> > "Although Wicket is a very convenient, efficient and powerful way to
> > code a web application, it almost certainly will consume more server
> > side resources (memory in particular) than most existing frameworks,
> > including JSP, Tapestry and JSF. In other words, the benefits of
> > Wicket are not achieved without a price. "
> >
> > "Since no significant applications have yet been written in Wicket,
> > performance characteristics of the toolkit are not yet well understood
> > and it is expected that Wicket may not be appropriate for web
> > applications which require especially high performance and/or which
> > must be highly available."
> >
> > Yikes......not exactly a great advertisement.
> >
> > e.
> >
> >
> > On Feb 14, 2005, at 12:49 PM, Robert Zeigler wrote:
> >
> >> Eric Schneider wrote:
> >>> Jonathan,
> >>> Does wicket have built-in state management similar to Tapestry? (i.e.
> >>> persistent page and component properties, form rewind, etc.).
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> eric
> >>
> >> I just checked the link out briefly; it does, indeed, have built-in
> >> state management. I just did a quick once over of the site, but, as
> >> far as I can tell, here are some of the key differences between the
> >> two frameworks:
> >>
> >> 1) Tapestry gives you the choice of going stateful (through the
> >> session) or stateless. In wicket, all applications seem to be always
> >> stateful (via the session). In return, it looks like the state
> >> management may be a bit more transparent (in most but not all aspects)
> >> in wicket than in tapestry.
> >>
> >> 2) Wicket components and pages consist of an html template (appears to
> >> be required) + a POJO class (also appears to be required). Tapestry
> >> components and pages consist of an html template (components may or
> >> may not have a template), a .jwc or .page (xml) configuration file,
> >> and a java class (optional). Thus, it looks like all configuration
> >> and wiring of objects to pages is done in java code in wicket, ala
> >> swing.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3) All template-backing java classes in wicket are POJO. In tapestry,
> >> you have to implement the IComponent interface or the IPage
> >> interface, which usually consists of extending one of several base
> >> classes. However, HLS appears to be looking into ways to change
> >> that, so, look for POJO page and component classes in tapestry in
> >> the future.
> >>
> >> Other notes:
> >>
> >> The quickstarter page mentions that they assume you have at least java
> >> 1.4 installed; I'm not sure if that means that wicket requires java
> >> 1.4, or if just the quickstarter kit requires it, but it's something
> >> to keep in mind.
> >>
> >> They make some claim about component libraries being worlds easier to
> >> put together than in tapestry of JSf. I can't speak for JSF, but
> >> tapestry component libraries are really pretty trivial to put
> >> together, so I think this is an exaggeration, personally.
> >>
> >> Both are available under the apache 2.0 license.
> >>
> >> I will stress the fact that I just did a pretty quick once over of the
> >> wicket site, so, take the post with grain of salt. =)
> >>
> >> Robert
> >>
> >>> On Feb 14, 2005, at 12:02 PM, Jonathan Carlson wrote:
> >>> Just to mention... Wicket is a Tapestry-like web framework that
> >>> hasn't reached 1.0 yet, but seems much simpler to learn than
> >>> Tapestry while still using a pure HTML markup like Tapestry.
> >>> When they get the UserDoc rewritten to reflect all the changes
> >>> they've made, it will be hard to beat. (IMHO :-) The original
> >>> creater worked at Sun on the Swing toolset (don't hold it against
> >>> him :-) and is a good documenter.
> >>> http://wicket.sf.net
> >>> - Jonathan P.S. No, I'm not a Wicket developer,
> >>> but I'm a Tapestry-approach
> >>> admirer who has been very pleased with how quickly I've become
> >>> productive with Wicket.
> >>> >>> michael_gentr..anniemae.com 2005-02-11 9:51:07 AM >>>
> >>> Just to beat on the drums some more, Cayenne is my new EOF. With
> >>> the 1.1 version, Cayenne really became capable of replacing EOF
> >>> (optimistic locking, etc) for my needs. The GUI modeler is
> >>> useful (compare to open source ORM frameworks). The framework
> >>> and
> >>> modeler
> >>> are under active development. Plus, you have the source code.
> >>> Let
> >>> me repeat: You have the source code! I've been able to step
> >>> through
> >>> the code in the Eclipse debugger to figure out what was going on
> >>> (usually my mistake, but sometimes you catch a Cayenne bug and
> >>> when
> >>> you report the problem, which you can do with great precision, it
> >>> gets fixed -- quickly). The mailing lists are great. There is
> >>> an energy here that is missing with EOF/WO.
> >>> I've started using Tapestry a bit, too. I'm by no means an
> >>>
> >>> expert,
> >>> but it seems to be WO-like. Has some nice things compared to WO,
> >>> but lacks some things in WO, too (can't reuse bindings is a big
> >>> annoyance). Cayenne works great inside Tapestry. Cayenne +
> >>> Tapestry + Tomcat: Free. Having the source code: Priceless.
> >>> /dev/mrg
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> *From:* Dov Rosenberg [mailto:dov.rosenber..onviveon.com]
> >>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2005 7:52 PM
> >>> *To:* cayenne-use..bjectstyle.org
> >>> *Subject:* Re: Cayenne vs EOF: How to questions?
> >>> That is good to hear. How dramatic of a change is it to move from
> >>> EOF to Cayenne? Are you using Tapestry as well? Have you come
> >>> across
> >>> anything that has given you pause about Cayenne?
> >>> Thanks in advance
> >>> -- Dov Rosenberg
> >>> Conviveon Corporation
> >>> http://www.conviveon.com
> >>> On 2/10/05 6:37 PM, "Bryan Lewis" <brya..aine.rr.com> wrote: On
> >>> the first question, I'm currently converting several old apps
> >>> from WebObjects 4.5 to Cayenne and have had no trouble keeping
> >>> our old flattened relationships. See the user's guide:
> >>>
> >>> http://objectstyle.org/cayenne/modelerguide/modeling-object-layer/
> >>> flattenedrel.html
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> *From:* Dov Rosenberg <mailto:dov.rosenber..onviveon.com>
> >>> *To:* cayenne-use..bjectstyle.org *Sent:*
> >>> Thursday, February 10, 2005 5:52 PM
> >>> *Subject:* Cayenne vs EOF: How to questions?
> >>> A few questions on the capabilities of Cayenne as compared
> >>>
> >>> to Apple
> >>> EOF
> >>> 1. Does Cayenne support flattened relationships like EOF?
> >>> If so,
> >>> what is the equivalent? 2. I understand that Cayenne does
> >>> not currently support
> >>> EOPrototypes to make it easier to switch between databases, what
> >>>
> >>> is
> >>> the Cayenne preferred method for supporting multiple databases?
> >>> Seems like it has something to do with DataMaps. Not sure though
> >>>
> >>> 3. How can I programmatically swap out my connection dictionary
> >>>
> >>> at
> >>> application startup? I.e. Allow me to store userid/password in
> >>> separate file from the cayenne.xml and update them when the app
> >>> starts up. 4. Is there a hook for generating primary keys
> >>> on the client side
> >>> similar to what we currently do with a DatabaseContextDelegate
> >>> and
> >>> our own guid generator? 5. Is there any Cayenne support
> >>> for doing lightweight, high volume
> >>> SQL processing (i.e. For batch updates)? EOF has too much
> >>> overhead
> >>> for large amounts of sql processing in batch mode. Ideally a
> >>> smarter version of RawRowsForSQL that doesn't create all the
> >>> objects in an object graph.
> >>> Thanks in advance.
> >>>
> >>> **********************************************************************
> >>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> >>> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
> >>> they
> >>> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please
> >>> notify
> >>> the system manager.
> >>> www.katun.com
> >>>
> >>> **********************************************************************
>
>
-- Joćo Paulo Vasconcellos ICQ: 123-953-864
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Feb 16 2005 - 11:19:28 EST