On 11/3/05, Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Struts Classic" keeps making me think "That's not the version I want > -- I want Struts Modern". > > On 11/3/05, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > VW was making Bug/Beetle for 50 years or so, it acquired Classic > > status sometimes in 60-ies, before Golf/Rabbit was introduced ;-) > > Well, no one's calling today's VW Bug "Beetle Classic" (although I > liked the year 2000 model nickname "Y2KBug"). "Beetle Classic" makes > me think "Herbie". Same thing happens when I hear/read "Struts > Classic". It makes me think "Struts 1.0". > > > > P.S. I'd rather see some progress in cloth washer design, seems that > > it froze in 50-ies. > > And from what you said earlier, it's what they now call "classic". > Again supporting my opinion. Calling 1.3 Struts Classic means "it's > the same old Struts", with the emphasis on "same old", implying that > there's something else, another version out there that isn't "old" and > "classic". Well, what we have now is "Struts Modern", with the new > flexible CoR request processor, where you can use Commands instead of > Actions. Really doesn't deserve to be called "Classic" IMO.
Struts Contemporary, anyone? ;-) This thread (or pair of threads) just emphasises that naming is one of the hardest parts of software development... -- Martin Cooper Hubert > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
