I don't see the point in bundling Shale into a "Struts 2.0" distribution. No offense to anyone who develops Shale, but when we have packages called "action2", it makes it pretty clear Shale is not Struts 2.0 -- only the action framework. Separate frameworks, imo, get different names and distributions. I am not offended Shale is within the Struts community, but I do not see it as the torch bearer to the name Struts -- I do see that with the AF, which historically holds the name. -- Paul
Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My quick thoughts: I think realistically either of the following two outcomes are positive developments for everyone: 1) We move in the direction of "Struts 2.0", which houses all SAF2 and Shale and get back for it being OK for folks to say, "I use Struts". We've all said we want to work together closer, but it's just talk until we take action to do so. This strategy, as proposed by Don in this thread, would be the first step in taking action. 2) Shale becomes a TLP. We continue to share code and ideas where it makes sense, but that is entirely optional. This is effectively what we have now, except that it would be formalized. I would prefer option #1, but I know it could be hard to pull off. Either way, both are good routes to go down and would be healthy for the community. Patrick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=34915&messageID=68478#68478 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------- Yahoo! Sports Fantasy Football 06 - Go with the leader. Start your league today!
