Tom Roche Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:49:45 -0500 >>>> summary: McClanahan should clearly state *in some major >>>> publication*
OK, mebbe it'll get cited in some major publication :-) >>>> * that JSF does/will not "replace Struts" >>>> * how JSF and Struts will likely tend to specialize, in future >>>> * how probable specializations will complement (and compete) in >>>> webapp development Ted Husted Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:28:17 -0500 >>> I think either of us would rather be developing Struts than >>> evangelizing Struts. Tom Roche Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:00:00 -0500 >> This is not about "evangelizing": it's about clarifying the >> relationship between 2 large parts of J2EE's future, and correcting >> some (apparently) false perceptions. So I am pleased to note: http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/craigmcc/20040927#struts_or_jsf_struts_and > It should be clear by now that there is overlap between Struts and > JSF, particularly in the view tier. Over time, JSF will continue to > evolve in the view tier area, and I'm going to be encouraging the > Struts community to focus on value adds in the controller and model > tiers. Now I can whack the locals who say "Struts? Isn't that what Faces replaces?" :-) Thanks, Tom "hoping to tool for Tiles this rev, at last" Roche --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
