I foresaw this time coming.... That is why Ive been working on jQuery-Roo integration.http://pragmatikroo.blogspot.com/201...velopment.html
Competition is always good. Welcome to Play!!
I really feel that Roo should only generate structure (HTML) and no look (CSS) at all. Who wants all web sites to look the same anyway? I don't want premade themes. I want to make the design and frankly any attempts to "do it for me" is not helping. On the contrary, it's delaying me from getting what I need. What professional want premade looks to start with? This is thinking that is not what I believe the users want. What do you think?
I elaborated on these thoughts in the thread Who wants Roo to generate the look anyway?.
Last edited by MiB; Jan 8th, 2012 at 06:21 PM.
What is really needed is community driven front-end addons. Kind of like word press themes that you install and your whole crud is magically transformed. Its easier said than done, but that would be ideal. For some one who has limited experience of design, I would rather use a good theme than to do every thing from scratch.
What we need is an addon revolution and more integration and extension points in core roo.
To each his own. Themes are inferior usually, unless they are extremely minimal yet useful. A minimal improved administration theme could be useful, but for a public site original design is commonly needed.
What I'm missing is the bare naked approach with only roo-managed data with minimal mark up and some hooks with all visuals left to the designer.
If Spring can integrate Roo and Wavemaker I will be in hog heaven.
I like your proposal. I would include it in my R&D list and try it on Roo soon.Kind of like word press themes that you install and your whole crud is magically transformed
Special thanks to retrofit for bringing Play to my attention...
I just post a 10K feet view first-impression blog on it. This is the link http://pragmatikroo.blogspot.com/201...pressions.html. In case you might be interested.
B and Play regards
Last edited by delgad9; Jan 14th, 2012 at 07:52 AM. Reason: clean up
Compiling Aspect files (far too slow for me)
Modifying the CRUD web interface and in particular manipulating Dojo and jspx tags etc.
To be honest I was completely happy committing to Spring Roo for my next project (as I mentioned http://forum.springsource.org/showth...ercial-project). However something like Play ups the stakes again for me - if I can still use JPA whilst being able to more quickly create and customise the web interface...
For someone new to Spring Roo and with some Java and web development experience I believe the Dojo/jQuery distinction is going to be key. I am now a bad jQuery and Dojo developer (I am happy to tinker a little with both after my Spring Roo experience). If I had the choice before chosing Spring Roo I may well have chosen to stick with jQuery and work with Play.
So for me the number one answer to what does ROO need to do to be a goto option - provide the option to use jQuery for the web interface.
In fact I would feel that this is a more important choice for web developers (which may well be the biggest Roo user group?) than the ActiveRecord/DAO choice.
play eclipsify , netbeansify etc. generate project files to allow you to import in your ide. You cannot do java dev without IDE support and play makes it painless. Moreover performance is much better compared to other frameworks. Google for performance comparisons with node etc.