struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dakota Jack <>
Subject Re: [OT] RE: [ANNOUNCEMENT] New Struts Committer: Gary vanMatre
Date Fri, 26 Aug 2005 04:38:54 GMT
Well, you aren't doing a great job, David, because what you have never
noticed happened again this last week.  Why don't you try doing a
search for SHALE and JSF for the last week?  I really don't think this
is a big deal, but wonder why someone would bother saying what was
going on here without making at least a cursory check.  Anyway, your
suggestion is clearly mistaken.

On 8/25/05, David Durham <> wrote:
> Dakota Jack wrote:
> > First, comparing Struts and JSF is like comparing C++ and Visual
> > Basic.  Struts is REQUEST-DRIVEN MVC and JSF (Shale) is PAGE CENTRIC
> > RAD (rapid development with tools as in VB).  Anyone that cannot see
> > they don't go together, frankly, is not that insightful, in my
> > opinion.  The present idea that they go together is one of the more
> > interesting marketing ploys in my recent experience.  I have to admit
> > that Craig is not only a superb coder but also a clever politician.  I
> > would have bet big money that no one could convince the Struts
> > community to share a bedroom with JSF.  I would have lost.  I still am
> > amazed.
> >
> > Second, Rod Johnson only has three books out that I know of.  There is
> > a whole section on web frameworks in Ch. 13 of Expert One-on-One J2EE
> > Development without EJB.  That is where I "read it".  You can read the
> > same thing from numerous other folks in the Struts lists as well.  Of
> > course, if you don't want to see it, you won't.
> >
> > Third, I am amazed that people who consider themselves to be expert in
> > this area, and who should be expert in this area given their status,
> > people such as yourself, Matthias, even argue this point.  A modicum
> > of understanding of the two frameworks shows that they are like night
> > and day.  Indeed, Craig is constantly trumpeting that JSF is a "new
> > deal" which should tell you that it is not what he now decries as the
> > "old deal", Struts.  He says it is a huge architectural shift.  He is
> > right.  You CANNOT combine the two.  You CAN mix them into what is
> > essentially a mush, a hodge-podge.  But, you cannot combine them.  You
> > have to have a switch that chooses one over the other in the mix.
> > That is what Rod Johnson says and that is what I agree with.
> >
> > Fourth, I am about to leave the debate arena on this one, however.
> > This is all too nutty for me to stick with any longer.  I don't mind a
> > good spirited debate on architecture, but I am not intersted in a
> > political community with its head in the sand.  When a VB expert is
> > voted into the C++ expert community, that is enough for me.  And, when
> > a JSF expert is voted into the Struts community, that is enough for
> > me.  I have to admit that I am completely enamored anyway with the
> > Spring IoC and AOP approach and believe that a one can build something
> > akin to the Struts package there.  I will, of course, remain
> > interested in Struts even though the interest will be more one of
> > morbid fascination with the process that is happening here.
> >
> > Cheers!
> Thanks, I'm following this list off and on, but fairly regularly, I
> don't recall anyone else saying "hey, this shouldn't be in struts".  I
> have no doubt that others feel the way you do, just interested in some
> names that's all.  I don't think this is a decision that's made based on
> technical merits as you suggest it should.  From what I can tell, this
> is a community effort as much as it is a technical effort.
> - Dave
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message