Re: Ruby on Rails on i site back up -- WEB400

Subject: Re: Ruby on Rails on i site back up
From: Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen <ravn@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:22:03 +0100
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/web400>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Aaron Bartell skrev:

So true. In many ways RoR made other frameworks
look embarrassingly complex. Apache's Tapestry was another that was heading
in the direction of RoR and was an answer to JSF's complexity/inflexibility.

JSF 2.0 should be much better.
I still like the JSF approach, but found the implementation tedious to work with. I hope that I will have a "YES!" experience with 2.0 :)

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.