I think it might be beneficial to do both xwork and webwork as separate project at this point of time. At least, people will spent less time debating at mailing list and get things done. I guess there is no right or wrong here, it is just that people have different preference and needs. For instance, I only do webapp and certainly don't want all the extra complexity/coolness of xwork. IMHO, xwork if implemented base on idea presented here so far is a very different beast from existing webwork and might as well start off as a fresh project.
Also, if we just concentrate all the efforts on xwork ( which will probably need sometime to mature ), we are neglecting the immediate need of existing webwork users. Look at webwork 1.3, it have been at rc1 for sometime and nobody seems to care about its status. Not to mention it still lack documentation, real world example application, have outstanding xdoclet bug, etc. --- Rickard_�berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Erik Beeson wrote: > > Rickard, as I understood, XWork was to break away from J2EE, hence > > removing "web" from the name. If new versions with strong web ties are > > going to remain, shouldn't they remain under the original WebWork name? > > That is something I wanted to gauge by my last couple of emails. I > personally do not believe (at this point) that making the web part > "optional" is going to work very well. I certainly don't believe that it > is going to be feasible, or even a good idea, to make a framework that > allows code to be written for both Swing and the web. They're different > beasts with different requirements, with completely different thinking > behind how code gets written. We have a lot of Swing code in our > project, and when I look at it I simply don't see how something like > XWork would fit in, or why it would be useful. > > What *is* useful is to allow actions to be called without a servlet > environment, but more or less *only* for testing/debugging purposes. > Executing actions as a response to asynchronous messages could work too. > But that's about it. I do not believe that actions (except for maybe 1% > of special cases) can be reused in so different spaces. I remain open to > the *possibility* of it, but so far I just haven't seen it. > > So, given all of this, my resignation from XWork still holds. The > requirements that have been voiced the last few days are not mine, and I > don't think they're compatible with my goals, at least not without > serious compromises that will only hurt the end result. The question > then becomes: would it be useful to do *both* XWork and WebWork, but as > separate projects with these different goals? > > /Rickard > > -- > Rickard �berg > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Senselogic > > Got blog? I do. http://dreambean.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
