> > I have a couple of comments to make about this. > > First of all, presumably the whole motivation of this > "merger" is that > you could unite your energies on a common framework. > If there is still > ongoing work on 2 different frameworks, it kind of > belies the whole > point of the merger, doesn't it? > > Now, my understanding of the point that Michael > Jouravlev was making is > that, once you label something as version n+1 of > something, you are > basically putting out the message that version n is > superseded. > Typically, verseion n+1 of a product supersedes > version n. I may be an > excessively simple-minded guy, but if I hit a website > and can download > FooBar version 1, or FooBar version 2, I guess I'll > go with version 2. I > will also just assume that all new development is on > version 2, not > version 1. > > What would a casual observer make of this? You > "merge" with a competing > framework in order to combine your efforts (i.e. not > disperse your > efforts on 2 different products as before) and you > label Webwork as > Struts Action 2 when the existing product is version > 1. I put it to you > that, on the basis of this, nobody with common sense > would count on any > further development of Struts 1.x taking place. > People will just > naturally draw the conclusion that Struts 1.x > development is being > abandoned. If it was not your intent for people to > think that, then you > chose a very strange product naming strategy. > > Now, even if, contrary to all outward appearances, > this conclusion is > wrong, and you guys really do intend to further > develop Struts 1.x, how > much credibility do you have on this as things stand? > > Throughout most of the past 4 years, Struts 1.x was > the only thing > called Struts and was presumably the only real focus > of development of > Struts committers. However, development stagnated. To > tell people that > there is going to be any significant development on > that codebase now, > when it is competing for attention with another > codebase (labelled > version 2 of same (!)) is asking people to believe > quite a bit. > > But in any case, if whatever project management > practices that were > followed over the last few years continue to be > followed without > considering any changes at all, why should a rational > person expect > results any different than what there has been over > the past few years? > This would be a valid question IMO even if there was > no merger with > Webwork and no Shale. > > If you continue with the exact same approach, which > has yielded rather > poor results, and besides that, you don't bring in > new people to work on > Struts 1.x, why should one expect anything much to > come out of it? > > My sense of things is that you should either just > forthrightly tell > people that Struts 1.x development is being > abandoned. Or, if it isn't, > you should immediately offer to bring in people who > are interested in > working on it. Obviously Frank Zammetti is > interested. I suspect that > Phil Zoio would be interested. Probably other people > too. > > But as things are, the contradictory message you are > emitting just seems > outrageous. To prevent people who are able and > willing to work on Struts > 1.x from getting actively involved, and all the while > emit confused > messages claiming that Struts 1.x is not really being > abandoned, surely > this is a bit much for even people around here to > swallow, isn't it? > > Jonathan Revusky > -- > lead developer, FreeMarker project, > http://freemarker.org/
This is exactly like the split we had a few years ago when Patrick and I decided to start from scratch with WebWork 2. There still remains a userbase for WebWork 1.x (Jira, as mentioned, is built on 1.x) and some development time is still put into it. Over time, the community shifted to a more and more 2.x focus, but there are still people answering WebWork 1.x questions. Development of 1.x is now mostly bug fixing (although there really aren't very many bugs found anymore) and sometimes backporting features from 2.x. So yes, you can have both, and yes, over time the community shifts to the next version. No one is saying 1.x will be cut off and no more work will be done on it. How much development is done there will depend on what the community needs in terms of bug fixes and new features, possibly some back ported from SAF 2.x to make it easier to migrate to SAF 2.x later. Don't forget that Struts 1.x still has the largest user base of any framework. No one thinks that a ship of that size can be turned on a dime. :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=29563&messageID=57927#57927 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
