On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:27 -0400, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:14:15 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote: > >ïI also suspect, given our track record :-), that re-engineering > >ïStruts from scratch based on the latest platform APIs wouldn't take > >ïmore time than a gradual refactoring from the current code. > > I sometimes wonder if not getting a clean start is why things keep taking so long. :)
This is definitely a factor. > The codebase was not designed to be easily tested. People are skittish about making > significant changes, and so we tread softly and slowly. To mangle an old chestnut: > I've been test-first, and I've been test-last. Test-first is better (and faster!). Given when (in the evolution of Java best practices) Struts was developed, I've been delighted at how long it has remained viable. Given where technology has proceeded since then, I'm personally going to be focused on the "revolution" approach rather than "evolution". That's not to say that we (as a project) can't do both in parallel. > > But I probably won't be involved with new development myself, and them that do the > work can make the decisions :) > To the extent that this (you not being involved in the new development) turns out to be true, I'll be sad for not getting to continue to appreciate the immense number of high quality contributions you've made to Struts (in code, documentation, process, and community building) -- and glad to see that you haven't given up on open source projects at Apache :-). Good luck with your future endeavors! But we won't have any problem keeping your committer access readily usable either :-). > Anyway, it does sound like the consensus is to create STRUTS_1_2_BRANCH at the 1.2.2 > tag, dub the HEAD 1.3.0, and document the minimum for the HEAD as Servlet 2.3. +1 > > -Ted. Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
