FYI http://jroller.com/page/dgeary
> -----Original Message----- > From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 8:44 AM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: JSF vs. Struts > > > I personally think all this exploration is a Very Good > Thing(tm). There > are a vast number of different ideas out there as to how a modern > application framework should be built. Mistakes have been > made over the > years, lessons have been learned, but we don't all agree on what the > mistakes were or what the lessons are! If that sounds bad to > anyone, it > isn't. It's quite the opposite and is the only way healthy > debate and > ultimately progress is made. > > At some point we're going to have to all weed out the options > that don't > quite measure up, and that will happen via simple market forces (the > market in this case being mostly developer mind share), but I don't > think that time is now, so the more experimentation, the better. > > I for one am not willing to declare one thing better than > another... I > regret having done that in the past prematurely, and > certainly not in a > manner I'm especially proud of. So, I'm certainly not going > to make the > same mistake twice. > > I'm still not sold on JSF, that much has not changed. I do however > think there is some decent ideas underpinning it, which is > also the case > for many of the other frameworks and approaches out there, so > declaring > JSF or anything else for that matter a failure now is > probably not fair > either. I do think Jack's point about JSF being around for a > while and > not really setting the world on fire is fair, although that > doesn't mean > it has failed, just that it's going a little slower than > hoped. My take > on JSF is simply this: we'll see. I'm not sold yet, but I'm > not willing > to say I never will be. > > As for Shale, I'm not sure I understand why Rod or anyone says that > Struts and JSF are not compatible... if the thinking is that > the result > will be quite a bit different from Struts as we know it today, then I > suppose he might be right. That to me doesn't make them incompatible > though. From what I have seen of JSF, and what I know of > Struts, I can > conceive of ways they could be fit together. I haven't had a > chance to > get into Shale yet, but I have no doubt many of those ideas, and many > more I haven't thought of, are present. Why they are incompatible I > just don't get, and I don't care who is making the claim, no > matter how > well-respected they are, I need to see some real, concrete examples > before I'm convinced. > > Struts Ti looks pretty interesting... many of the ideas that were > described here a few days ago were quite good in my mind. > Should it be > the future of Struts? I don't know yet, and I'm not even sure those > developing it would be willing to say that at this juncture. It's > another possible path, another exploration of possibilities, > and that's > good. > > One thing is for sure: most of us look back on the way we developed > applications just five years ago and wonder why we ever did > things that > way. I have absolutely no doubt we'll be doing the same thing in > another five years. I too would like to see less hype sometimes, but > promoting ones' ideas is human nature. If you think you have a > compelling answer, or even the One True Answer, you tell > people about it > and try and convince them. That's hype. It may not always > be helpful, > but it's perfectly natural :) > > Frank > > Dakota Jack wrote: > > I have to agree personally with Rod Johnson "J2EE without EJBs", > > Spring framework architect, etc., when he says that Shale > is merely a > > stopgap and that Struts as we know it is simply > incompatible with JSF. > > That seems fairly obvious and I find it hard to believe that anyone > > familiar with the issues would think any differently. I personally > > would not hire anyone would thought differently, whether > they like JSF > > or not. > > > > JSF is not new. JSF has been around forever, so it cannot be the > > cutting edge. If it is cutting, it is the "cutting middle" > and almost > > the "cutting tailend". The JSF idea has been around even > longer with > > all sorts of frameworks which I personally think do it better. > > Indeed, I think it fair to say that one of the main > architects of the > > JSF framework has said as much but has to feed his family. > > > > Certainly, if you like JSF, knock yourself out. Love it to > death. I > > don't care. I only care about giving people that ask a fair > > evaluation of the product without the hype. > > > > On 8/10/05, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Quick correction: Struts is _not_ forking in any sense of the word. > >>Struts Ti is a sandbox project several of us are working on as an > >>exploration of a simplified framework more like Ruby on Rails than > >>JSF. It has not been accepted as a Struts subproject, just as Shale > >>has not been accepted as "Struts 2.0". > >> > >>The Struts project is currently in, what I would call, a state of > >>exploration. In addition to Shale and Ti, there are other projects > >>like Struts Overdrive, Struts Flow, etc., which are also exploring > >>different aspects of web development. Of course, there > will be Struts > >>classic still for a long time to come which will continue to forego > >>active development. > >> > >>I think Struts is realizing there is no "one way" when it > comes to web > >>development. If a particular project or approach interests > you, join > >>in. Personally, I think shale will be a great success > building on the > >>strong JSF framework, and if it meets your needs, give it a shot. > >>Just as not every web application is the same, neither is > their needs > >>for a framework. > >> > >>Don > >> > >>On 8/10/05, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>Those of you on the Struts Developers list. Would you > like to comment on > >>>this? > >>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>James Mitchell > >>>Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist > >>>Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance > >>>EdgeTech, Inc. > >>>http://www.edgetechservices.net/ > >>>678.910.8017 > >>>AIM: jmitchtx > >>>MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Skype: jmitchtx > >>> > >>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: "MyFaces Discussion" <users@myfaces.apache.org>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 7:29 AM > >>>Subject: Re: JSF vs. Struts > >>> > >>> > >>>currently the are *forking* :) > >>> > >>>Struts Ti > >>> > >>>see here: > >>>http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/dev@struts.apache.org > /1854691.html > >>> > >>>and Shale (aka Struts 2.0) is build on top of JSF. > >>> > >>>It is a framework for JSF ... > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>On 8/10/05, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>>Doing both, I only can recommend, if you can omit struts and go > >>>>directly for MyFaces (not the JSF RI, it lacks severely) > >>>> > >>>>Struts feels somewhat dated in many areas compared to JSF. > >>>> > >>>>Werner > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Aleksei Valikov wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>Hi. > >>>>> > >>>>>Could anyone post a good link on Struts vs. JSF > comparison? I have a > >>>>>meeting in 40 minutes where I need to push through my > decision on using > >>>>>JSF for a large project (GIS/Map Viewers). Seems like I > can argument my > >>>>>decision, but some additional support material would be helpful. > >>>>> > >>>>>Thanks in advance. > >>>>> > >>>>>Bye. > >>>>>/lexi > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Matthias Wessendorf > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>----------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >>------------------------------------------------------------ > --------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Frank W. Zammetti > Founder and Chief Software Architect > Omnytex Technologies > http://www.omnytex.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
