So, on short notice, I traveled down to North Carolina to do two days of Tapestry training and mentoring for RoleModel Software. This was a really great experience for me ... RoleModel is a very dynamic group. When they like something, they really let you know. RoleModel is headed up by
Ken Auer, an early, vocal proponent of
(having writing at least one book on the subject).
RoleModel is all virtual, it's Ken and a bunch of sub-contractors ... but these guys are pretty darn sharp. In addition, a couple of the junior members are apprentices ... one is still in high school. I've
been dubious about pair programming, but it was interesting to see it in action. Their layout is one computer per pair, but with duplicated monitors, mice and keyboards. Anyway, the whole arrangement really resonated with me when I later listened to Dave Thomas' session at NoFluffJustStuff, because it is wrong to treat people at radically different levels of experience identically. Dave identified five levels of experience. At RoleModel, you could see this in action, as the apprentices would work with more experienced folk a level or two above them on the ladder.
I even tried my hand, helping Ken work out how to use the Tapestry Tree component. He was doing a lot of typing, I was doing research and writing down diagrams to understand how the Tree's data model works. Even with two deeply experienced coders, it was working surprisingly well (but we only had an hour to try this). It's important to keep an open mind.
Back from North Carolina Thursday night, on Friday morning I picked Erik Hatcher up at Logan airport and we hooked up with a bunch of other folks for the Boston NoFluffJustStuff event. We were largely scheduled opposite each other so I didn't see him present at all. I did attend
David Geary's sessions on Java Server Faces. Good, clear presentation, ambitious if awkward technology. I did learn that at least some folks on the JSF committee are aware of Tapestry ... and I promised him that I'd be raising the bar ever higher. I also gave him a copy of the book (he's going to send me a copy of Core JSF when it is published).
I also attended a session on Groovy. Groovy is a mix of Java, Python and Ruby. It's a scripting language ... but it compiles directly into Java bytecode. Types are optional. It has closures (like Ruby). It adds methods to existing JDK classes like String and Collection. You can completely mix and match Java code and Groovy code. Richard did a great job of describing the language (and even identifying its faults), though the consensus was that he should have fired up a window and just typed the examples live, rather than use slides. The fact that Groovy is in the Java Community Process is odd ... since it is so compatible with Java, there doesn't seem to be a need. Even so, once it stabilized (and if it doesn't go into kitchen-sink hell), I can actually see using it for real code inside Tapestry and HiveMind. I did have a few
ideas, and Richard encouraged me to join the mailing lists.
Those were the only technical sessions I attended; however Bruce Tate's session on simpler, faster, better Java was fun. It fits in with my own philosophy (and I'd like to see Tapestry and/or HiveMind as another example, beside Spring, WebWork and Hibernate). This was a continuing (and occasionally divisive) theme all weekend ... J2EE as the enemy not the solution. My philosophy is obvious on this blog:
- Use only what you understand / cherry pick what's necessary
- Use simpler solutions, don't buy into the whole stack
- J2EE APIs are just starting points; don't build directly on the metal ... add a layer between
The other great, non-technical session I attended was
Dave Thomas's session "Herding Racehorses and Racing Sheep". He's a great, entertaining, dynamic speaker but also well researched. The session was any number of things; what's wrong with our industry, how to cope with outsourcing, how to advance in your career properly. Some of it tied back to my earlier experience with Ken Auer, since his team is doing at lot of what Dave was preaching.
I did three sessions, 90 minutes each, all on Sunday. During the Tapestry intro ("Building Web Forms With Tapestry") Erik was there to help field questions. I also gave away a copy of the book, which went over quite well. It was pretty lively and, based on the session evaluations, quite well received. I do want to try more of Erik's approach, whereby I develop parts of the application live and rely on pre-written slides less. First I have to figure out my problem's with Jay's projection monitors (currently, I can get it to work by extending my desktop onto it ... if I'm facing the audience, I can't see what I'm typing). I neglected to count attendance, but the room was pretty full ... maybe thirty people total.
The HiveMind session was more sparsely attended but equally lively. I think everyone in the audience had a specific axe to grind but saw how HiveMind could help them. Again, maybe a little more live, or a more realistic example, would be good.
The final session of the day was the Creating Components session ... fewer people than earlier in the day (fifteen or so ... I have to remember to count them). Complicated stuff, but people were digging the concepts. Again, live would be better ... in fact, people were very impressed with
Spindle, which I used in just the last few minutes. I kept finding new features in it, while I was demoing it!
I am concerned that my sessions ran too long ... right up to the ninety minute mark. That means I'll run over at The Server Side Symposium. I think I've been so concerned about running short that I haven't accounted sufficiently for questions from the audience.