struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dakota Jack <dakota.j...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Struts offers "Shale" for JSF
Date Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:21:56 GMT
I have no reservations about your sincerity, Patrick, and I am glad to find
you at Struts.  Welcome!  However, I would be careful if I were you about
being sanguine about your new companions.  I hope things turn out as you
have indicated.

On 12/16/05, Patrick Lightbody <plightbo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think I can offer a somewhat unique perspective. As an "outsider" to
> Struts and someone who has spent 3 years living in the "WebWork
> world", I only recently many of the Struts developers and community
> this week at ApacheCon. Having been in a room talking about this very
> issue with Ted, Don, Craig, Martin, Neil, Clinton, and others, I can
> say without a doubt that everyone is on board with this vision of
> Struts as a community and two parallel frameworks.
>
> More so, we are all in agreement that we will collaborate wherever
> possible, including:
>
> - common set of Java 5 annotations
>   - similar style configuration tricks (auto-reloading, consistent use
> of DTD or XML schema, etc)
> - validation engine
> - internationalization
> - possibly some tags even
>
> I'd also like to add that whatever the history has been, today I see
> Struts as a unique offering. In the web development space (regardless
> of language), there are two schools of thoughts:
>
> - action frameworks: bind requests to methods in beans
> - event/component frameworks: don't worry about URLs as much and bind to
> events
>
> I think it is fair to say that marketplace of developers has not yet
> decided that one of these is a clear "winner". Struts, as a community,
> is uniquely positioned to offer both options and is best prepared for
> the day when that winner is declared. We all agreed that when that day
> comes, by working together in other areas (validation, i18n, config,
> annotations, etc) not only will the code be easy to merge, but the
> community will be too. No other web development community offers this.
>
> As someone who has said some pretty disparaging remarks about Struts
> technolog and community in the part (I'll do the google search for
> you:
> http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2003/10/webwork_docaday_struts_really.html)
> ,
> I can comfortably say I made a big mistake in choosing to create a
> divide but that I've learned from that mistake and that is why I am
> here today.
>
> And I believe that everyone in the Struts community is also on board
> to continue the grow the spirit of cooperation, not only between
> Struts Action and WebWork, but between Struts Action and Struts Shale.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 12/16/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fzlists@omnytex.com> wrote:
> > I think it is fair to say that many of us have made similar comments
> over
> > the past few months, and have every time been basically told that it is
> > our problem we are not "getting it".  Usually we've been told nicely,
> but
> > not always.  That isn't the point though,  The point is that this is not
> a
> > new complaint by any stretch, and it has previously been dismissed on
> many
> > occasions by more than one person.
> >
> > --
> > Frank W. Zammetti
> > Founder and Chief Software Architect
> > Omnytex Technologies
> > http://www.omnytex.com
> > AIM: fzammetti
> > Yahoo: fzammetti
> > MSN: fzammetti@hotmail.com
> >
> > On Fri, December 16, 2005 10:37 am, Patrick Lightbody said:
> > > This sounds familiar :)
> > >
> > > I definitely would recommend changing the slides and title of the
> > > presentation. Just yesterday I ran in to this:
> > >
> > >
> http://javasymposium.techtarget.com/html/det_descriptions.htm#McClanahanShale
> > >
> > > Changing the title to something like "Shale: the Struts Component
> > > Framework" would certainly clear this up. We need to be firm and clear
> > > on the idea that Struts has many sub-projects, and two major
> > > frameworks: an Action framework and a Component framework.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On 12/16/05, Dakota Jack <dakota.jack@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> With some people like Craig McClanahan delivering talks at
> significant
> > >> conferences entitled with contrary ideas like "Is Shale the next
> > >> Struts",
> > >> you might excuse people for thinking that this "subproject" ruse is
> > >> baloney.  I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and I have
> read
> > >> all
> > >> about the Trojan Horse.
> > >>
> > >> On 12/15/05, Craig McClanahan <craigmcc@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > By the way, the original decision to incorporate Shale as a
> subproject
> > >> > occurred nearly 11 months ago:
> > >> >
> > >> >   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-user&m=110651419515521&w=2
> > >> >
> > >> > -- Paul
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Craig
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > >> back."
> > >> ~Dakota Jack~
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>


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

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message