struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Cooper <>
Subject Re: Struts2 jQuery Plugin - Logo
Date Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:41:00 GMT
I'm here, and I've been following along. I just haven't had time to
consolidate my thoughts until now.

First of all, I hope everyone recognises that it's by no means my call; it's
the team's call.

The subject of Ajax tags in Struts 2 has been hotly discussed over a period
of years. At different points in time, different bases for such tags have
been the hot favourite, from custom code through Dojo to jQuery, with a few
other stops in between. Some of the work has happened here and some has
happened elsewhere.

>From my perspective, it is critical, in adopting any set of Ajax tags as a
baked-in part of Struts, that we, as a team, are fully convinced (a) that
the underlying toolkit is not just the flavour of the month and will last
for years to come, and (b) that we have a sufficient body of developers
committed to making it work today and keeping it working years from now. And
I do mean years here. Certainly the world will change, and the world of
highly interactive web apps will change. But think about this: Struts 1 was
first released 9 (nine) years ago, and many thousands of web apps that were
built on it are still running, and being maintained, today. I'm sure we
would all like to have that level of success, and longevity, with Struts 2.
It takes commitment, though.

I do take issue with a few statements that have been made in this thread
about Ajax toolkits. Rene said that we can consider Dojo "the biggest
loser". Can we really consider a toolkit that has seen corporate adoption
from the likes of IBM, Sun, AOL, Google, Nexaweb, and numerous others, "the
biggest loser"? Some people here may not like to work with it, but Dojo is
one of the biggest success stories in the Ajax world. That's not to say that
jQuery has not had its successes - and, as Wes points out, has seen adoption
by Microsoft - but jQuery is still a long way from "the" Ajax framework that
Rene asserts.

That said, the above is not an argument against the adoption of jQuery as
the basis for Struts 2 Ajax tags. It's merely my attempt to bring us down to
earth a little bit in our enthusiasm to jump on jQuery and ditch Dojo. Each
has its merits, as do other alternatives.

So, assuming the general concensus is to move forward with integration of
Johannes' tags, what are the next steps?

1) Musachy hit the nail on the head when he said "I would like for us to
define some strategy for this". It's crucial that we define, up front, where
we want to go with this. What should the Ajax tags include? What should they
specifically _not_ include, which is at least as important? Do we still
believe that what we want is a set of simple tags and nothing more? If not,
why not? How much coupling - that is, loose or tight - do we want to live
with? It would be great to see some (more) discussion of this kind of thing
up front, and perhaps the concensus documented on the wiki for all to see
(and abide by).

2) Once we've agreed on the major points from #1 above, we can take a
clear-headed look at what Johannes has done and assess how well it meets
those needs. What would need to be added? What should be removed, to keep it
streamlined to our objectives? We should be sure that we're not jumping on
the "cool" factor, and have something that forms the basis for our needs.

3) If we're going to bring Johannes' code into Struts itself, we need an
iCLA, and personally I would prefer to see us use the IP Clearance process
to make sure we're all squared away. Johannes' iCLA is on file already. The
IP Clearance process is intended to be straightforward and quick, so it
should not be an issue.

4) Musachy does raise an excellent question regarding commit rights and the
sandbox. We have not hit this exact case before. Obviously we'll need to
figure this one out.

One final point: I recognise and understand the enthusiasm that's behind the
"let's get it in here now!" sentiment, but really, we're not in a huge big
hurry. Let's take the time we need to think through where we want to take
this, before we head of down the road with it. A week or two here or there
won't make any difference in the long run, but poor decisions will.

Martin Cooper

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Wes Wannemacher <> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Rainer Hermanns<>
> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Here is my +1, but maybe we should call a formal vote on this?
> >
> I don't think we need a vote, the only person (voice of reason) so far
> was Martin. I would say that if you're listening Martin, chime in and
> let us know if we've convinced you yet. Or, let us know which concerns
> you want addressed before moving forward.
> -Wes
> --
> Wes Wannemacher
> Head Engineer, WanTii, Inc.
> Need Training? Struts, Spring, Maven, Tomcat...
> Ask me for a quote!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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