Not A Java Web Frameworks Survey: Just use Wicket!

‘Java Web Frameworks Survey’ was my first blog posted which was reposted at dzone. Sadly there never was a follow up of it. Although I planned one with:

jZeno, SpringMVC, Seam, Vaadin (at that time: IT-Mill Toolkit), MyFaces, Stripes, Struts, ItsNat, IWebMvc

Now, today just a short, subjective mini-follow-up, maybe someone is interested after all those months … over the months I have additionally investigated JSF, Rails, Vaadin and one more:

  • No comments to JSF:-/
  • Rails is great! Especially the db migrations and other goodies. Partials are a crap: I prefer component based UI frameworks. If you don’t like ruby take a look at grails with autobase.
  • Additionally I highly recommend everyone to take a look at vaadin (‘server-side GWT’) if you need a stateful webapplication. Loading time was a problem for me. Other client-side performance problems can be solved if you use CssLayout, I think.

But for jetwick.com I chose wicket! There were/are 10 reasons:

The most important thing is: if you use ‘mvn jetty:run’ and NetBeans in combination then the development cycle feels like Rails: modify html, css or even Java code. Save and hit F5 in the browser. Nothing more.

The only problem is the database migration (wicket solves only the UI problems). For that I would use liquibase. Or simply run db4o, a nosql solution ‘or’ solr.

12 thoughts on “Not A Java Web Frameworks Survey: Just use Wicket!

  1. “pre-HTML presentation technology”. this does NOT mean HTML presentation technology is better.

    “This duplication of information”. yes. one might think so. but you can reuse your components with that approach. I don’t love this, but I can live with that. and it is not complicated nor a maintainance nightmare.

    • >“pre-HTML presentation technology”. this does NOT mean HTML presentation technology is better.

      With all my respect I did not get your idea well. Please give an example of pre-HTML presentation technology that was better than HTML.

      >“This duplication of information”. yes. one might think so. but you can reuse your components with that approach. I don’t love this, but I can live with that. and it is not complicated nor a maintainance nightmare.

      Actually in the article a triplication of information by Widget is explained, not just duplication.

      As to components – it is a really big a topic, maybe a good topic for a separate discussion. The problem is that all use this term in a different way. E.g. components in Wicket are something different than (and probably even incomparable with) components of JSF. In Spring we see three types of components – from components type V you can build a View of a page. From components type C you can build a Controller for a page. Same about components of type M (there are tree absolutely separate chapters in their book). In HybridJava there is only one type of components, but each component is MVC. Once I guessed that loops are components in Wicket I understood that this thing will never work any fast.

  2. regarding hybridjava: FREE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL USE. Sorry, but as a user I wouldn’t even take a look at a java webframework with that licensing😦

    There are too many good open source alternatives! (see my post + the old survey post)

  3. > I wouldn’t even take a look at a java web framework with that licensing
    > There are too many good open source alternatives!

    If you do not look around you will maybe think forever that some of those alternatives are indeed good. If just one of them was really good you will not see so many of them. Though Sun has to some extent drove Java into a deadend, still – do you see many alternatives to Java?

    BTW the situation with licensing has changed since that publication of August 2009. As of today it is plain registration.

    I will appreciate if you read a more mature text on our website. It is really much-much shorter than documentation of any other Web Framework.

  4. Hi Kenalex (why not just use one name?),

    > With all my respect I did not get your idea well.
    > Please give an example of pre-HTML presentation
    > technology that was better than HTML.

    If the web would serve only static HTML sides: then yes, there is no better pre-HTML technology. But for dynamic pages … I prefer component based (+HTML) like wicket or even HTML-less style like vaadin. But this is only a personal preference.

    > If you do not look around

    If I wouldn’t look around, I wouldn’t have created the survey …

    BTW: there are django, rails, … more popular than the framework you propose and: open source!

    > As of today it is plain registration.

    Why not changing it to LGPL or apache?

  5. Hi Karussell!

    > If I wouldn’t look around, I wouldn’t have created the survey …

    I appreciate that you have created a survay. I would not contact you if you did not create a survay and did not invite others to provide information. Such survey is a very difficult thing. There are about 50 only Java solutions claiming to be a framework. Actually many attempts were made but I may not tell that I saw a great one. Maybe this one is most successful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_application_frameworks.

    What I do not understand though. This should not be a marketing survey should it? Rather it should be a scintific survey. Web framework set available is way unlike a set of car makes and models. We do not even have a settled set of criteria to start with a definition of a component. Nevertheless it looks like you have refused to consider the technology I support just on the merits of licence. I hope I am wrong. And I hope you will continue your work on this survey. I also may suggest my paricipation. Currently I am interested in Web and Java Server side frameworks only. Not in GWT or Swing. I may analize one technology of your choice. But again – working on criteria may be way more important at this satge.

    Will you be so kind as to explain why you like open source so much. In particular – why may it good for a framework developer?

  6. Hi Kenalex🙂,

    please do not take my choice personal, especially the post above is very subjective and so, my choice to choose wicket is personal, too. Although the original post (‘Java Web Frameworks Survey’) was made without any intention or recommendation because I for myself wanted to choose a framework.

    I like open source because it is “… inexpensively. Besides, it offers the potential for a more flexible technology and quicker innovation.” take from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software

  7. Hi Karussell!

    I do not see anything personal or offensive to me. And I respect you choice. (Unless I do not have to follow your choice myself😎.

    I did not understand what you tell about open source though.

    Must open source product be indeed free? May a different kind of source be inexpensive too?

    Why do you think that “it offers the potential for a more flexible technology and quicker innovation”? I agree that there are products that are created to be expandable by many independant developers in many different directions at the same time, like Eclipse. I do not think many projects belong to that class though, e. g. compilers do not.

    Java compiler was not an open source for many years and I do not see any indications that making it open source may help it and help Java as a language. On the other hand Java class library did successfully expand in many directions and by many teams WITHOUT being an open source.

  8. > May a different kind of source be inexpensive too?

    The problem I have with non-open source applications: I do not have ALL possibilities. It would be fine for me to give away some money to buy a proprietary program. BUT every proprietary license limits me in different ways. Some limits me in using it on restricted hardware or with restricted developers only.
    (So AGPL and GPL wouldn’t be great for me to. E.g. my timefinder.de project is Apache licensed …)

    As for your license: registering only is ok. But I do not have a future garanty that it will remain that simple/’free’. If it would be open source and the company behind the source decides to close the source, even after that I could take the earlier source and do what I want with it.

    So, for me ‘free’ software is what matters, not the ‘open source’ thing.

  9. Pingback: Twitter Search Jetwick – powered by Wicket and Solr « Find Time for the Karussell

  10. Hi!

    SO version 1.02 is for your attention. And all the source code of framework’s run-time is included into delivery as well. The included code is qualified as Open Source.

Comments are closed.