Hmm... I'm just about to post a reply to that entry. Basically, I feel
that although JSF itself can be great view-tier technology, it isn't
really a full replacement for Struts. JSF+Shale *is* a replacement for
Struts, but I think that's a point which is often lost. An interesting
thing about Struts Ti is that it would treat JSF as a first-class view
tier without depending on it for anything else. That may or may not
turn out to be important, but it does keep JSF as a peer to other view
technologies, rather than at the core.
I don't think JSF and Struts are incompatible, as long as JSF is being
used as a (powerful) view. Intra-page event handling works fine with
something like Struts. When the other more general-framework-type
functionality is used, there's a conflict.
In general, I agree with the sentiment that there's a lot of hype in
this arena, and not all of it is easily backed up. But the Struts
community has always been a bit hype-adverse, no?
Rich
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
