Hi Andrew,

I know it's terribly unfashionable to say this, and I understand
there has been a significant amount of work on 3.0 towards Stripes
(and perhaps this is also somewhat of an academic argument), but
I really much prefer the JSPs. No, there's no framework, no "real"
MVC, and this likely goes against the current of thought, but
frankly I consider the use of scriptlets a real benefit, not a
problem.

JSPWiki is not so complicated an application, and wikis are by
nature a tinkerer's toy, that shoving everything up into a framework,
adding in complicated features that make modifying the site more
difficult, well, the move away from JSPs was one reason I was
considering moving away from the JSPWiki platform.

It is after all named *JSP*Wiki.  I happen to think that the
combination of JSPs, with their easy-to-edit combination of HTML
and Java code, as an ideal environment for customising wikis.
Maybe we could rebrand this project as "retro" and it would gain
enormous momentum.

My 2 cents anyway...

Ichiro

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Andrew Jaquith
<[email protected]> wrote:
> From the vantage point of someone who is inactive with the project, but
> also the principal author of the Stripes MVC integration:
>
> - Stripes had several goals, chiefly to (1) refactor the JSP scriptlet code
> out of the JSPs and into proper JavaBeans ("ActionBeans" in Stripes
> parlance)
> - Simplify JSP markup and input validation (replace HTML form tags with
> Stripes equivalents)
> - Replace the "command pattern" extensions to WikiContext, introduced in
> the 2.8 range, with something saner (the ActionBeans)
> - Create a more solid back-end interface for managing JSON requests from
> browsers
>
> Almost all of the forms porting was done, plus or minus a few things. I was
> pretty happy with how it turned out. There is some wickedly clever JSON
> processing in there (via the Interceptor classes) that was barely tapped;
> it would have radically simplified a lot of Dirk's code. Yes, Stripes is
> another framework, but it's pretty lightweight; and much, much lighter than
> Spring, for example. On the flip side, it's not in widespread use; indeed,
> Spring has pretty much steamrollered over most of the other JEE frameworks,
> even as lots of dev energy has left the Java world entirely.
>
> One more thing about 3.0. I added in some pretty solid code for integrating
> with LDAP and AD for authentication, group access controls, etc. This could
> be re-used in the 2.9 codebase pretty easily, with a little light
> refactoring.
>
> Whether the team wishes to use the rest of 3.0 code (including Stripes) is,
> of course, up to the team. If I can be a resource/mentor, let me know.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Florian Holeczek <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hi Ichiro,
>>
>> well, that's basically it - more than enough I'd say, since these two are
>> really big points. You can have a look at www.jspwiki.org, there are some
>> pages on 3.0, too.
>>
>> Regards
>>  Florian
>>
>>
>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>> Von: "Ichiro Furusato" <[email protected]>
>> An: [email protected]
>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 9. Dezember 2012 23:53:08
>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] How to proceed with the 3.0 efforts
>>
>> For those of us who've not followed the 3.0 progress (or lack thereof),
>> could
>> someone provide a very brief synopsis?
>>
>> My understanding is that the 2.8.x branch is fully functional and
>> basically an
>> update of the com.ecyrd.jspwiki code in Apache packaging, and that the 3.0
>> branch was an attempt to rewrite the backend using Janne's JSR-170 subset,
>> but that hasn't moved forward. I didn't know about any plans for Stripes.
>> But
>> this is all just a guess based on:
>>
>>     A new effort is started to graduate with a 2.9 codebase (based on 2.8),
>>     so no JCR backend and no Stripes, but the traditional JSPWiki, the
>>     progress can still be followed at our JIRA issue tracker.
>>
>> [I'm frankly happy with the "traditional" 2.8/2.9 code base as it's
>> compatible with a substantial number of extant projects and plugins.
>> I'd prefer JSPs over Stripes, or anything that adds complication.]
>>
>> If there's a web page describing the goals of 3.0, a reference would
>> be good. The JIRA roadmap isn't that helpful.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ichiro
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Florian Holeczek <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > sooner or later we will have to decide on how to proceed with the 3.0
>> > efforts (available in the JSPWIKI_3_0_BRANCH).
>> > The discussion already started on a different thread (see below), but I
>> > think it's a good idea to explicitly continue it on a new thread.
>> >
>> > @Harry: I fully agree with your mail cited below.
>> > Though I wish it was different, I personally have little hope on reviving
>> > 3.0 without the help of Janne and Andrew, which seems unlikely at least
>> in
>> > the medium term.
>> >
>> > What do the others think, especially Janne and Andrew?
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >  Florian
>> >
>> >
>> > -------- original message --------
>> > Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (JSPWIKI-713) Creating a page doesn't
>> work
>> > on 3.0
>> > Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 12:12:59 +0100
>> > From: Harry Metske <[email protected]>
>> > Reply to: [email protected]
>> > To: [email protected]
>> >
>> > Agree with that statement. But let's then decide what to do with 3.0
>> stuff.
>> > My main objection is that it is cluttering up our JIRA issue list, and it
>> > is misleading people.
>> >
>> > If anyone of us still has some hope on reviving 3.0 then I'm OK with
>> > leaving things as they are at the moment.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> > Harry
>> >
>>

Reply via email to