On 12/21/05, Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, but I'm going to try to tweak this proposal with the hope that > it makes this whole discussion even simpler: > > I propose we get rid of the name Ti entirely. Just as there is no such > thing as a Struts framework (Struts Shale and Struts Action, right?), > I propose that from this day forth we shun the name "Ti". > > Instead, we agree to make what was Struts Ti phase 1 effectively > Struts Action 2.0. This is no different from what Don is suggesting. > On top of that I recommend we agree that Struts Ti phase 2 (flow, > annotation, Rails-style development, etc) be henceforth known as > Struts Action 2.x. In short, we agree that we'll do it in a future 2.x > release. > > It may be that some of these features, like other features of Struts > Action 1.x (Tiles, Tags, etc) will eventually be rolled out in to > their own project, but for now I propose we just agree to move forward > on Struts Action 2.x and let natural selection take place as time goes > on and spinoffs potentially take place.
+1 on this paragraph (and Don's #1 and #2), which I think Martin's agreeing with as well. The only possible difference between us I can see is whether we keep the existing "Ti" sandbox project around for experimentation. I don't see any problem with that, *IF* we make it clear to the world what Struts Action Framework 2.x actually is (the result of the merger), and that Ti becomes no longer a proposal (in fact, we get to declare victory, because the proposal is being accepted) -- and leave Ti to be a sandbox for ideas that might be too radical for even the Action Framework 2.x folks :-). Does that sound reasonable to you? Patrick Craig
