As I’m busy creating a presentation for my employer to show that the car bombs were a good investment, I make good use of Peter Pilgrim’s blog, as he made very good notes of all the presentations he attended. I wish he had attended all presentations, so I could ‘borrow’ his notes for those I attended ;-).
Thank you Peter, for your great comments!
From the blogging search after the Smackdown, I’ve found the Code Ronin to have blogged about it, and the following quotes made me trigger:
Out of those presented, the only ones I can see us migrating to are JSF, Tapestry, and Shale. Why not Wicket and WebWork? Well, while Wicket sounds delightful, it sounds really different, and as for WebWork, I have to agree with Craig.
Glad to hear that Wicket sounds delightful, but considering your next statement on JSF:
Using JSF will be easy. The biggest con is that the tags it presents are VERY GUI oriented, designed to replace HTML in the JSPs. That’s great for developers, but not so great for the web integrators at my workplace who like to code their own HTML and JavaScript, thank you very much. Still, my boss spoke of visual beans two years back, and that’s what JSF is.
I REALLY ENCOURAGE you to take an interest in Wicket as we allow the web designers to design and developers develop nearly independently. Wicket has a pure HTML nature fulfilling your requirement to allow webdesigners to design the pages.
I invite you to check it out and see whether you like it. It is too early to dismiss it based on ‘it sounds really different’. I attended several JSF sessions on JavaOne, sat through both ‘Tapestry in Action’ and ‘WebWork’ presentations, and I dare to say: Wicket is far more easy to grok than the other component based frameworks, and I might add: the current myriad of MVC frameworks.
Geertjan Wielenga is quite busy writing down his experiences with Wicket. A quote from his message to our user list:
The last few days I’ve blogged about nothing but Wicket, which rarely happens — I tend to jump around from topic to topic.
It is always nice to hear someone using your product and becoming very enthousiastic about it!
In my quest for more feedback on the Web Framework Smackdown, I’ve found this blog entry. I don’t agree with the author that it was too nice. In my opinion the idea was to convince people to leave the current MVC or JSP/servlet paradigm behind and create stateful, rich web applications using the component based frameworks of today. And they succeeded more or less.
Having each speaker jack hammering the other’s brains out with statements like ‘Mine is smaller than yours’ (lines of code, that is), or in the case of JSF ‘Mine is bigger than yours’ (XML files) wouldn’t have helped the discussion.
The general sentiment of the panel was: move to component based development or be left behind. Like David Geary said:
“Struts is old school, get over it”
Here’s a photo of the contenders in the Smackdown.
