Asad Habib wrote:
Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota is
talking nonsense?
Well, the truth is that it's hard to
Right Dakota, enough of your insulting childishness please.
Like I have said before, there is more to choosing a technology than
just picking the most modern and cutting edge one. Like I have said
before, I don't CARE that Struts 1 is not the most up to date tech, I
care that it a) does what
Right,
You assume that Struts 1 was a disaster and was messed up. Not all of us
agree with you. I for one don't. If you look at it from my point of view
and that of the others who agree with me there is no big burning
question to be answered because there was no massive cockup. If everyone
Well said!
Asad Habib wrote:
Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota
is talking nonsense?
Yes, indeed, WE do! Paul,
I don't have any personal issues in this discussion, other than finding the
level of discussion an absolute embarrassment to mankind. My questions are
based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like or don't like. I
Bart, if you don't think there is a problem, move on. There is nothing here
for you. I can only imagine that your involvement in Struts is at the level
of playing, if this is your attitude. I have left tinker toys behind and am
trying to deliver to real world problems.
I hardly think that
Dakota Jack wrote:
I don't have any personal issues in this discussion, other than finding the
level of discussion an absolute embarrassment to mankind. My questions are
based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like
Dakota Jack wrote:
Bart, if you don't think there is a problem, move on. There is nothing here
for you. I can only imagine that your involvement in Struts is at the level
of playing, if this is your attitude. I have left tinker toys behind and am
trying to deliver to real world problems.
On 4/1/06, Bart Busschots [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dakota Jack wrote:
My questions are
based on a professional concern about the stability of a widely used
platform. It also has nothing to do with what you like or don't like.
snip
I let the first three weeks of your discussion go by
What are the popular technologies in your area?
If you talk about web applications then .NET, or anything else that maintain
people (managers) brainwashed with marketing instead of looking for the best
option, in the worst case non technical people make technical decisions about
development.
So you are ecstatic that your design choice of Struts 9 months ago has been
determined by the Struts committers to be a bad choice? You should fit
right in around here with your logic. Webworks has not be included,
Busschots. Webworks, which was around when you made your BRILLIANT choice,
is
Do you think there is any value in letting a situtation which led to the
problem go by without lessons learned, Paul? Do you think just because the
people who coded the hairball are not talking about it we should just let it
drop and believe that they won't do the same thing with WebWorks? Is
Do WE think that Dakota has said his fair share and that his ideas are
STALE? Do WE think that Dakota should stop harassing others on this list?
Do WE think that too much Dakota talk is bad? Do WE think that Dakota is
talking nonsense?
Yes, indeed, WE do! Paul, I, and lots of others on this
Vinny wrote:
Jon, I think most of use were well aware of the merger.
See : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-userm=113321040221316w=2
We've hashed over this before you showed up:
and this : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11334881332r=1w=2
You might want search our archive a bit.
--- Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
people don't grok
what is going on, or at least the full implications.
If one does
understand the full implications, one ought to be
quite wary about
continuing to invest in building
Konstantin Priblouda wrote:
--- Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
people don't grok
what is going on, or at least the full implications.
If one does
understand the full implications, one ought to be
quite wary about
continuing
On 3/30/06, Konstantin Priblouda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but now there is serious demand (in germany).
Not in the San Francisco Bay Area; in craigslist, Struts: 80, WebWork: 2.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
Konstantin Priblouda wrote:
--- Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
people don't grok what is going on, or at least the full implications.
If one does understand the full implications, one ought to be
quite wary about continuing to
What are the popular technologies in your area?
On 3/30/06, Joel Alejandro Espinosa Carra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Konstantin Priblouda wrote:
--- Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I don't see that, I have to conclude that most
people don't grok what is going on, or at
Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
1.X. So the problem seems to be that two groups trying to achieve the
same thing have come together and merged. Hang on a sec that's NOT
a
Bart Busschots wrote:
Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
1.X.
I'm not precisely whining about that.
Anyway, I have one question that intrigues me. Did you understand what
was going
On 3/29/06, Bart Busschots [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, as I see it this all boils down to Jon whinning that the struts
guys are adopting WebWorks for the basis of struts 2 rather than Struts
1.X.
And you see it wrongly. Either you came late into this and could not be
bothered to check the
This topic has become stale, in my opinion, and I do not understand
why people continue to participate in it. When people attempt to have
a successful discussion, there is usually a goal to attain, but I am
unable to discern what serious goal there is in telling the commiters they
are, in so many
Bart Busschots wrote:
OK, I'm keeping this short:
1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them become part of
struts, they chose that
True, though I never claimed that a gun was put to anybody's head.
2) The struts team now contains the WebWorks guys right? So there is no
To answer your question, not in any detail no. I just knew struts was
incorporatng another project. I didn't care about the details then and I
still don't now.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Bart Busschots wrote:
OK, I'm keeping this short:
1) No one put a gun to the WebWorks guys and made them
Bart Busschots wrote:
To answer your question, not in any detail no. I just knew struts was
incorporatng another project.
Okay, thank you for sharing that.
I didn't care about the details then and I
still don't now.
That's odd. For a guy who is this apathetic about the whole thing, you
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
[...] and I will not argue with you.
Oh ha ha, another Jonathon Revusky impersonator. But you slipped up
here, didn't you!
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Jon, I think most of use were well aware of the merger.
See : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-userm=113321040221316w=2
We've hashed over this before you showed up:
and this : http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11334881332r=1w=2
You might want search our archive a bit.
Anyway, I
28 matches
Mail list logo
