Johnathan, I don't see the necessity of a problem from within your viewpoint. Struts 2.0 is going to be built from WebWork; I suppose you can consider Struts 2.0 a fork of WebWork, because, unless I am unaware of something here, this doesn't prevent other people from developing WebWork if they want to continue it. It is going to become a different product and probably contain new things WW may not want to do on its own. So, I understand your perspective, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the way things are being handled. And as Ted pointed out, WW folks are on board with this. -- Paul
--- Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Benedict wrote: > >>>cry that they are so innocent and all (such wonderful > >>>people) but surely there is some agenda in wanting to excise "webwork" > >>>and "ww" from all the code, isn't there? > > > > > > Isn't the purpose of this to excise the webwork name? > > Well, at the marketing level, maybe. That this necessarily translates to > excising the string "webwork" from all the package names is less > obvious. As an outside observer, I see no need to systematically remove > the string "webwork" from everywhere as if it were a curse word. > > Also, my understanding was that Struts is now an "umbrella" and that the > gain was from being under that umbrella. I don't see how this requires > the string "webwork" or "ww" to be excised from everywhere, down to the > nth level of package names -- in particular, once the package names > start with org.apache.struts. > > It would more imply excising the string "opensymphony" from everywhere > -- which is a step that I find completely understandable, since > opensymphony is an umbrella and webwork is moving from that umbrella > over to this one. > > > I thought > > it was. Why else would you want to become "Struts 2.0" if not > > for the name? > > Well, there is no "Struts 2.0" really. At least that's my understanding > of the official line now. Struts is an umbrella. You have Struts Action > and Struts Shale. > > > I don't see this renaming as a slam against the heritage, > > but this entire process doesn't make any sense unless you're specficially > > wanting to be rebranded as Struts. > > Well, my guess is that the motivation of the Webwork people for this was > to *gain* the Apache/Struts name, not particularly to *lose* the Webwork > name. If Apache/Struts is now an umbrella, that implies replacing the > string "OpenSymphony" rather than the "Webwork" string. > > Jonathan Revusky > -- > lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ > FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
