Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
Heh, Xaymaca! Nice to hear from you. On 3/19/06, Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > :0 > * ^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > /dev/null > > > > Dakota Jack wrote: > > Here is a JSF big gun. At least now we know what this surprising new > > committer who seems to know nothing about Struts does; he reads > > motivational books. > > > > On 3/19/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> > >>> You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > >>> does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > >>> and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > >>> since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > >>> a standard? > >>> > >> *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese ( > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). > >> > >> Gary > >> > > > > > > -- > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its > back." > > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- > Stay Ghetto : http://www.ghettojava.com > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
I have expressed my "technical concerns" more than once. I have even had Craig agree with them, in a sense. JSF is built for those who are technically challenged and for tools. I don't think even Craig thinks that JSF is superior as a product for advanced webwork. Who knows anymore, however. Look under my discussions, many of them,. about page based controllers and my advocacy of a web-MVC. Why don't you say just what the major reason is that you chose Shale, JSF, MyFaces, or whatever over Tapestry? Do you think we should have Tapestry under the Struts "umbrella" too. On 3/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You are the one always > bashing JSF, so express your specific technical concerns for once. This is either ignorance or a lie. I have always backed up my arguments with my technical concerns. That is where my concerns come from. They don't come from kissing anyone's butt, that's for sure. I have decided I could give a s.h.i.t. what people like Gary say about trolls. There is only one person in this particular exchange that has not given the basis for their choice and that is you. If you don't want to, fine. But don't try to pass off blatant falsity about what I have or have not done as the truth. arguments, you always seem to run away. Yet you complain about logical > fallacies and you attack personally Gary. You don't want to be called > a troll but you certainly not helping your case. This is a huge, unfortunate, misunderstanding which I suppose now will gain currency. There is absolutely nothing inconsistent or otherwise discordant between an front controller and Ajax. That is sn inanity. > For my part, I really appreciated working with Struts for a long time > but I think the zenith of Action-based frameworks has passed, > especially with the advent of Ajax. Is that a website that is being used presently? > I prefer as my coworkers do to > using component frameworks now and that why my corporations is > switching from Struts to JSF. And no Dakota it has nothing to do with > Shale or Craig, we gave a try at Vanilla JSF first and even if there > were some rough spots, we were quite happy with it. Plus, JSF have > some momemtum at the moment, just look at the different innovations > going around it now (Seam, Shale, facelets, ADF, tobago, ...). This debate is not about Struts versus JSF. That is the stupid sense of it. This is about the inappropriateness of JSF being in Struts. Frankly, if someone does not get that, I think they have to either be twisted, not too bright, or have a hidden agenda. > Well I guess I don't really care about this religious debate. -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
:0 * ^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null Dakota Jack wrote: Here is a JSF big gun. At least now we know what this surprising new committer who seems to know nothing about Struts does; he reads motivational books. On 3/19/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't a standard? *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). Gary -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Stay Ghetto : http://www.ghettojava.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Struts CMS ?
yeah I am using LenyaCMS for a major client but it's totally based on xsl, xsp, java, ant CMS produces static html pages that are picked up by several struts application. -Original Message- From: Alexandre Poitras [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:35 AM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: Re: Struts CMS ? If you want to use Lenya wich is based upon Cocoon, you should take a look at the Cocoon plugin for Struts : http://struts.sourceforge.net/struts-cocoon/ On 3/18/06, Shshank Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hii, > > Are there any Content management systems (CMS) which can be easily > integrated into Struts based systems ? > > Presently trying to get things working with lenya. > > -Shanky > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Alexandre Poitras Québec, Canada - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Struts EJB 3 tutorial
Actually, it's been my understanding that struts is pretty much a BYOM (Bring Your Own Model) kind of framework. Tutorials that show workable ways of abstracting out persistence to DAOs and such are always welcome to me. Like Ricks struts-spring-ibatis tutorial: http://www.learntechnology.net/struts-spring-ibatis.do for example. In fact I'd love to see stuff like this for hibernate, cayenne, ODB and all the rest of 'em in a centralized location. Planet Struts, perhaps? Leon Rosenberg wrote: Not Found The requested URL /download/first-ejb3-ant-tutorial-en.pdf was not found on this server. however, I don't have a clear understanding why should someone need an ejb3.0 struts tutorial? It's like offering a tutorial on driving and shopping. If you are able to do both of the actions standalone, you'd be able to combine it. If you misses the basic knowledge, you should first learn the basics, and then combine them. Learning both together will only suggest to the people that both things, which has nothing in common, except that they can be used together, belong together, and they are not. Leon On 3/17/06, Sebastian Hennebrueder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, I have just finished a EJB 3 - Struts tutorial and put it on my website. It is available for free as HTML and PDF at http://www.laliluna.de/EJB-3-tutorials.html As far as I remember, I have not yet announced tutorials in this mailing list. The smart-questions site and your mailing list information did not explain if I am allowed to announce free tutorials. Please, contact me if this is not appreciated by the common sense and I will refrain from further anouncements. -- The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. - Albert Einstein - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Shale] shale-mailreader could not be started
Do current automated builds of Shale Mailreader represent its finished or near-finished state, or it is still work in progress? Michael. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: has struts reached the saturation
Welcome Jonathan! Better late than never :) Jonathan Revusky wrote: I think here we have to agree to disagree. I see there being a responsibility involved that you don't. It isn't like anyone can just come along and contribute, contrary to what we might want people to believe, because there is a barrier to entry, namely those already involved. AND THAT IS FINE. In fact, it *has* to be that way because the alternative is just opening up commit privileges to SVN to anyone and everyone, and clearly *that* isn't a good idea :) You say this as if it is the most obvious thing in the world. But is it? I am quite skeptical. You take as a given that commit privileges have to be closely guarded, like a high priesthood guards the inner sanctum. Yes, I do think it has to be guarded. I can think of two good reasons: outright malice and bad code. I am inclined to believe there are some people who would actively try to corrupt the code in some way simply because they have an axe to grind with the project. This could be very subtle, maybe introducing pieces of license-incompatible code. I don't imagine this would be wide-spread, I think the majority of people would behave themselves just fine, but to ignore the bad parts of human nature would be folly, and I think given the opportunity to add anything they wanted, the bad part would surface at some point. There could also be innocent mistakes made, like committing things that you think are license-compatible that really aren't. This could happen at any time obviously, but if you guard the commit rights, my hope is that you only grant the rights to people you believe understand how to avoid these mistakes more times than not. Also, I think there has to be some check on the quality of the code coming in. Especially when your talking about something like Struts that a lot of people base big, important projects on, I don't think it would be wise to let any Java beginner commit code without it being scrutinized. There are better places to "get your legs" than something like Struts. And plus, it is important to me at least that any committer on any project have a basic understanding of the overall code base, not just a small part to be sure the committed code fits with the overall code base. I am not talking about an individual who makes a targeted contribution here or there, I'm talking about a permanent committer who can commit whatever they want at any time (subject to veto by other committers). There is a third reason too actually: does the code at least somewhat jive with where the project is going? This was part of the debate all along... there has to be a balance between being open-minded and accepting new ideas, and just accepting anything that comes along. A good example is the SetupItems contribution I offered last year. While it doesn't represent a major paradigm shift or anything like that, the fact is that with Struts 1.3 in the pipeline, and chain being arguably a better solution to the same problem, it was, I feel, reasonable to say that the contribution maybe shouldn't have come in. I thought it was a good contribution, I in fact know a fair number of people took it and incorporated it on their own, but it was kind of superfluous with the chain refactoring coming, and so in a sense didn't jive with where Struts was going. What is the basis for really believing this? The idea, AFAICS (you can clarify) is that if you let "anyone and everyone" commit code, they will commit all kinds of low-quality stuff willy-nilly. Yes, I believe this is part of the risk. > My own experience running open-source projects has been that the vast majority of times that you give somebody commit rights to the code repository, they simply do nothing -- good or bad. In fact, my own experience would echo that. But I'm not sure that says giving commit privileges is inherently safe... maybe it just says people tend to get a little gun-shy when they are given extra power :) > When they do something, they are typically quite conservative initially since they are aware that they are new kids on the block and the others are watching closely. I agree, that is generally true. But would it be a good idea to open up the repository to just *anyone*? That's what I was talking about. Certainly some people wouldn't be conservative at first, they would jump right in, and without some sort of vetting process you can't be sure what will get in. Sure, you could always back it out if you had to, but that seems like cleaning up a nuclear meltdown rather than having safety regulations before-hand to avoid it in the first place :) (Sorry, just watched The West Wing) BTW, as regards the overall topic of discussion, I don't know whether JSF will be the next big thing or not. I have not the foggiest idea. OTOH, I do have an opinion about the Action/Shale cohabitation. My opinion, looking at the Struts com
Re: [shale] how MyFaces's component do layout
I cannot find the place to download Clay. Does Clay exist inside Shale already? In the first few lines of documentation, it says Clay is similar to Tapestry and Facelets. If there are available products to use, does Clay closely clung to Shale or Struts? On 3/20/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I will let Gary or Craig answer this one but if you use Shale, Clay is > your answer. > > On 3/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As I find JSF has h:subview or other h: component, > > can I use JSF component only such that I can do without Tiles? > > If yes, should it be h:subview or other component? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > -- > Alexandre Poitras > Québec, Canada > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: [shale] how MyFaces's component do layout
I will let Gary or Craig answer this one but if you use Shale, Clay is your answer. On 3/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I find JSF has h:subview or other h: component, > can I use JSF component only such that I can do without Tiles? > If yes, should it be h:subview or other component? > > Thanks > > -- Alexandre Poitras Québec, Canada - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
What? You want me to discuss what I don't like in Tapestry or what I prefer in JSF? I have no real concerns about Tapestry, I just prefer the way some things are done in JSF. But I wouldn't be afraid of using Tapestry either, it is indeed a good framework. You are the one always bashing JSF, so express your specific technical concerns for once. Frankly, when it comes to back up your claims with technical arguments, you always seem to run away. Yet you complain about logical fallacies and you attack personally Gary. You don't want to be called a troll but you certainly not helping your case. For my part, I really appreciated working with Struts for a long time but I think the zenith of Action-based frameworks has passed, especially with the advent of Ajax. I prefer as my coworkers do to using component frameworks now and that why my corporations is switching from Struts to JSF. And no Dakota it has nothing to do with Shale or Craig, we gave a try at Vanilla JSF first and even if there were some rough spots, we were quite happy with it. Plus, JSF have some momemtum at the moment, just look at the different innovations going around it now (Seam, Shale, facelets, ADF, tobago, ...). Well I guess I don't really care about this religious debate. I will still have to maintain some Struts application for a long time while developing in JSF and using Shale. Having a list sharing both approaches was a plus for me. Yes some people actually like it. I just don't write about it every days like certain person do. This mailing list is becoming less and less useful. Anyway, I am probably a moron since I don't agree with you, whatever... On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, since this is your preferred mode, lead the way. I will follow. > I felt that this was pretty safe, but if you have some contrary > opinions, please roll them out and I will be more than happy to > address your concerns. If you don't have anything specific, then I am > not interested. > > On 3/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > > a standard? > > > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I really do see these fallacies coming up at all. The fallacies which > > > typically come up are ones like: (1) argument ad hominem; (2) appeal to > > > authority; (3) appeal to common practice; (4) appeal to emotion; (5) > > > appeal > > > to flattery; (6) appleal to popularity; (7) appeal to riducle; (8) biased > > > sample. These seem to have a life of their own. Yours are, so far as I > > > can > > > see, never around. Could you give an example from someone's submission on > > > this list? > > > > > > Tapestry is as diverse as JSF and is in Apache as well as Struts, yet no > > > one > > > in Struts has ever complained about Tapestry. (Tapestry, by the way, > > > does, > > > in my opinion, what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it. If JSF > > > should > > > have tried to "horn in" for branding purposes, Tapestry wo0uld have been a > > > better choice than Struts.) However, if Craig had tried that, Howard > > > Lewis-Ship would have made him go through what everyone else goes through, > > > leading to JSF, inevitably, being show the door. > > > > > > This discussion is not about diversity. That is Ted's pronouncement which > > > is unrelated to the facts. This discussion is about greed and branding > > > and > > > JSF's difficulties getting a toe hold in the mind and eye of the public, > > > I > > > don't know of a single soul that does not wish JSF well when it is not > > > pushed on someone. Ted is right that committers on this list do what they > > > want to do. And, he is right that the committer clique decided to jump > > > into > > > bed with Craig and JSF. There are committer feet sticking out all over > > > under the covers of JSF and Shale. This is not to promote diversity. > > > This > > > was to serve themselves. That is irresponsible to their elected position. > > > > > > Ted's idea that serving an open source community is one way to do your job > > > is a big part of the problem, not a part of the solution, around here. > > > Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit > > > what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. This has been > > > especially prevalent the last year and a half. Ted finds this perfect. I > > > think it is an abomination. The motivation for working in open source used > > > to be more due to a desire to do top quality work, something many bright > > > people were stopped from doing at work or otherwise frustrated about. Now > > > my job, I don't know about yours, does more exciting work than anyone at > > > S
[shale] how MyFaces's component do layout
As I find JSF has h:subview or other h: component, can I use JSF component only such that I can do without Tiles? If yes, should it be h:subview or other component? Thanks
Re: has struts reached the saturation
perhaps this thread is now "has struts reached the obfuscation" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: has struts reached the saturation
>> I think that any project has to have some coherent message ... >> to have such an incoherent message due to this Action/Shale >> bifurcation seems very negative. It just seems complicated and >> confused. Jonathan, I whole heartedly agree. I do not know who came up with the idea that "Struts" is now an umbrealla label supporting multiple frameworks, but whoever did, I think, made a bad decision in regards to confusing what "Struts" is. Most of the philosophical problems we are dicussing on this board are readily observant; and I like to point them out because "you can't change what you don't acknowledge" (Dr. Phil). Now I've been told before this is similar to the "Jakarta" umbrella label -- except it's not. Jakarta has always been an umbrella label that holds multiple projects; Struts, generally speaking, started out as one framework and has mainly stayed there (even with Tiles). Oh well, this doesn't matter to the "engineers" but if it matters to anyone else, it's worth speaking out about. Paul __ 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]
Re: has struts reached the saturation
Jonathan Revusky wrote: > ... person who visits your website and starts looking at the > mail archive and so on has to be able to figure out quite quickly "WTF > is struts" and to have such an incoherent message due to this > Action/Shale bifurcation seems very negative. It just seems > complicated and confused. ... ... as a low-order coder, with a smaller brain than the demi-gods of code, I too would come to this conclusion. my first impression is that there are 3 things called Struts now in existance: 1/ Struts Classic (*real* Struts), ie: Struts versioned <2 2/ Struts WebWork ie: Struts versioned >=2 3/ Struts Shale ie: Struts JSF, any version my second impression is that each one is substantially if not totally different internally, interfacially and implementationally to each other, so don't bother swapping once your investment is in one. you pick one and one only to use, they don't work together, they compete for application choice. can someone with a bigger brain confirm, deny or fix this up? ta A Lost Moose - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: has struts reached the saturation
Frank W. Zammetti wrote: Ted Husted wrote: On 3/14/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: but I to this day do not believe it was the motivation of the larger entities involved. True. If those "larger entities" had any say, we wouldn't be merging with WebWork. If anyone wanted proof that we are making our decisions based on community, rather than the agenda of a "larger entity", there it is. No argument there :) This is where I do happen to disagree with you Ted. As I said earlier, Struts has become something more to a great many people. Many businesses rely on Struts. Many peoples' livelihoods depend on Struts. I hope you would agree with those statements. Because of that, you take on a greater responsibility than simply contributing. No. The people you mention should take on the greater responsibility of contributing to the project and doing what they can to make Apache Struts a continued success. I know I'm getting involved in this too late and maybe the thread has died down. The thing is that I was reading through this thread today (quite interesting stuff) and it mirrors stuff I've been thinking about. I think here we have to agree to disagree. I see there being a responsibility involved that you don't. It isn't like anyone can just come along and contribute, contrary to what we might want people to believe, because there is a barrier to entry, namely those already involved. AND THAT IS FINE. In fact, it *has* to be that way because the alternative is just opening up commit privileges to SVN to anyone and everyone, and clearly *that* isn't a good idea :) You say this as if it is the most obvious thing in the world. But is it? I am quite skeptical. You take as a given that commit privileges have to be closely guarded, like a high priesthood guards the inner sanctum. What is the basis for really believing this? The idea, AFAICS (you can clarify) is that if you let "anyone and everyone" commit code, they will commit all kinds of low-quality stuff willy-nilly. My own experience running open-source projects has been that the vast majority of times that you give somebody commit rights to the code repository, they simply do nothing -- good or bad. When they do something, they are typically quite conservative initially since they are aware that they are new kids on the block and the others are watching closely. In any case, I recently wrote a blog entry about this kind of stuff. http://freemarker.blogspot.com/2006/02/musings-on-wikipedia-and-open-source.html BTW, as regards the overall topic of discussion, I don't know whether JSF will be the next big thing or not. I have not the foggiest idea. OTOH, I do have an opinion about the Action/Shale cohabitation. My opinion, looking at the Struts community and website and the rest with newbie eyes is that this is disastrous. I think that any project has to have some coherent message and a person who visits your website and starts looking at the mail archive and so on has to be able to figure out quite quickly "WTF is struts" and to have such an incoherent message due to this Action/Shale bifurcation seems very negative. It just seems complicated and confused. Well, to put it another way, if I were assigned the task of evaluating different things in this space, and Struts was one of them, it is very unlikely that I would settle on it. I would almost certainly end up opting for a non-schizophrenic alternative. I don't know how other people see things. This is just my honest reaction. I have no vested interest in this. Regards, Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ But, being part of that necessary barrier too is part of the responsibility, at least as I view things. Deciding what is best for other people is a job better left to the "larger entities". Our role is to create the frameworks that we want to use to build our own applications, and share the wealth, best we can. Agreed, 100%. It's *after* you've shared that wealth and that wealth has turned into something bigger that I believe the responsibility comes in to play. I'm sorry to hear you don't agree, but I never said it wasn't a debatable point :) Right now, this year, for me, that framework is Action2. But, who knows, next year, I could be working on a JSF project. And, if I am, I'll be glad to find a Struts Shale framework here, ready for me to use. Same here. Believe me, I *want* Shale to continue to develop. Same for JSF. Same for Spring MVC, same for Wicket, etc. We can debate whether Shale is in the right place or not, but to me, it's existence is in no way questioned... it's a good thing! -Ted. Frank - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
You know, Gary, when you are advocating what has already been done well, Tapestry, under a new name, JSF, claiming to be the leading edge is not liable to lead to confidence in how you are finding your cheese. This is especially so when you have to try to sell the work by trying to wrangle the branding of another type of web framework. I don't think it is wise for horse thieves to talk about the way the West was won. On 3/19/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > > a standard? > > > > *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). > > Gary > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
On 3/19/06, Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit > > what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. > > Isn't that the point? So what does struts need according to dakota jack? A cool web framework? Committers that accept and encourage innovative and intelligent ideas? Some open minds? Look at the file upload mess in Struts and you will see what happens when someone codes for what they need on the job. -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
Here is a JSF big gun. At least now we know what this surprising new committer who seems to know nothing about Struts does; he reads motivational books. On 3/19/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > > a standard? > > > > *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). > > Gary > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
Well, since this is your preferred mode, lead the way. I will follow. I felt that this was pretty safe, but if you have some contrary opinions, please roll them out and I will be more than happy to address your concerns. If you don't have anything specific, then I am not interested. On 3/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > a standard? > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I really do see these fallacies coming up at all. The fallacies which > > typically come up are ones like: (1) argument ad hominem; (2) appeal to > > authority; (3) appeal to common practice; (4) appeal to emotion; (5) appeal > > to flattery; (6) appleal to popularity; (7) appeal to riducle; (8) biased > > sample. These seem to have a life of their own. Yours are, so far as I can > > see, never around. Could you give an example from someone's submission on > > this list? > > > > Tapestry is as diverse as JSF and is in Apache as well as Struts, yet no one > > in Struts has ever complained about Tapestry. (Tapestry, by the way, does, > > in my opinion, what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it. If JSF should > > have tried to "horn in" for branding purposes, Tapestry wo0uld have been a > > better choice than Struts.) However, if Craig had tried that, Howard > > Lewis-Ship would have made him go through what everyone else goes through, > > leading to JSF, inevitably, being show the door. > > > > This discussion is not about diversity. That is Ted's pronouncement which > > is unrelated to the facts. This discussion is about greed and branding and > > JSF's difficulties getting a toe hold in the mind and eye of the public, I > > don't know of a single soul that does not wish JSF well when it is not > > pushed on someone. Ted is right that committers on this list do what they > > want to do. And, he is right that the committer clique decided to jump into > > bed with Craig and JSF. There are committer feet sticking out all over > > under the covers of JSF and Shale. This is not to promote diversity. This > > was to serve themselves. That is irresponsible to their elected position. > > > > Ted's idea that serving an open source community is one way to do your job > > is a big part of the problem, not a part of the solution, around here. > > Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit > > what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. This has been > > especially prevalent the last year and a half. Ted finds this perfect. I > > think it is an abomination. The motivation for working in open source used > > to be more due to a desire to do top quality work, something many bright > > people were stopped from doing at work or otherwise frustrated about. Now > > my job, I don't know about yours, does more exciting work than anyone at > > Struts even has a dream about. Spring and other places are working on > > exciting, clean, real, stuff. This attempt to sell JSF has turned Struts > > into slogging away at best. > > > > Struts, in my opinion, by tying itself to the think and the values of a > > commercial product has completely lost track of any sense of what is and > > what is not open source and what is community. The entry to assisting on > > these things as a committer used to be merit based in the sense that you had > > some talent and could work with others. Now it is a club based on balancing > > the voting blocs. When Ted started, he could just jump in after showing > > that he was no fool, and start helping. Those real open source days at > > Struts are over at this point. Now any indication that you might actually > > make Struts grow or have something new and interesting to offer is a sure > > sign that you will be rejected. Things have gotten so bad with this that > > the committers had to admit that they essentially had killed Struts and > > needed to get some help from some people who really had been doing open > > source work. Those people will find, I predict, that they made a mistake > > coming here and that the Struts name was not worth it. > > > > > > > > On 3/19/06, Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Indeed! Hoo hah! Has anyone asked why Tapestry, which is just JSF done > > > > well in my opinion, is causing no difficulties on the Struts list? > > > > > > Diveristy is important, even those who don't agree with a darwinian > > > model seem to agree with this. Trying to push one size fits all would > > > seem to reflect an intollerance of ambiguity and perhaps demonstrates > > > more about an indiviual's personality traits than a genuine balanced > > > opinion. Who re
Re: Developing and running Struts on Tomcat without an Internet Connection
Sounds like Gurpreet.S.Dhanoa is decribing the same shotgun apporach that I was saying I used (making local copies of referenced files), which I've always been sure was suboptimal but it got me out of trouble. (ie: it "works") I'll try to take in the comments given of how to fix it optimally for next time. Thanks A Shy Moose Joe Germuska wrote: > At 9:37 AM -0600 3/17/06, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Best practice is to download the same tab lib files >> (Tld) and copy them in any of the folder under >> Your web application> once done change the path in your JSPs to load the >> tld file from your local path instead of jakarta.apache.org > > > This is not true. Struts never retrieves TLD files from the > internet. The fact that the URIs look like URLs is not important. TLD > files are retrieved from the JAR in which they are packaged. > > On the other hand, Struts does (and commons-validator does) retrieve > DTDs from the SYSTEM URL provided in a DOCTYPE declaration when doing > validating parses of the various config XML files, IF there is no > PUBLIC identifier, or if it doesn't recognize the public identifier. > > You can see exactly which PUBLIC identifiers Struts knows here: > http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/xref/org/apache/struts/action/ActionServlet.html#259 > > > For any DOCTYPE using one of these identifiers, Struts will retrieve > the corresponding DTD from the classpath instead. > > Hope this clarifies things. If it turns out that struts-blank has bad > public ids in its DOCTYPE, please file a bug to that effect. > > Joe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I really do see these fallacies coming up at all. The fallacies which > typically come up are ones like: (1) argument ad hominem; (2) appeal to > authority; (3) appeal to common practice; (4) appeal to emotion; (5) appeal > to flattery; (6) appleal to popularity; (7) appeal to riducle; (8) biased > sample. These seem to have a life of their own. Yours are, so far as I can > see, never around. Could you give an example from someone's submission on > this list? > > Tapestry is as diverse as JSF and is in Apache as well as Struts, yet no one > in Struts has ever complained about Tapestry. (Tapestry, by the way, does, > in my opinion, what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it. If JSF should > have tried to "horn in" for branding purposes, Tapestry wo0uld have been a > better choice than Struts.) However, if Craig had tried that, Howard > Lewis-Ship would have made him go through what everyone else goes through, > leading to JSF, inevitably, being show the door. > > This discussion is not about diversity. That is Ted's pronouncement which > is unrelated to the facts. This discussion is about greed and branding and > JSF's difficulties getting a toe hold in the mind and eye of the public, I > don't know of a single soul that does not wish JSF well when it is not > pushed on someone. Ted is right that committers on this list do what they > want to do. And, he is right that the committer clique decided to jump into > bed with Craig and JSF. There are committer feet sticking out all over > under the covers of JSF and Shale. This is not to promote diversity. This > was to serve themselves. That is irresponsible to their elected position.> > Ted's idea that serving an open source community is one way to do your job > is a big part of the problem, not a part of the solution, around here. > Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit > what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. Isn't that the point? So what does struts need according to dakota jack? This has been > especially prevalent the last year and a half. Ted finds this perfect. I > think it is an abomination. The motivation for working in open source used > to be more due to a desire to do top quality work, something many bright > people were stopped from doing at work or otherwise frustrated about. Now > my job, I don't know about yours, does more exciting work than anyone at > Struts even has a dream about. Spring and other places are working on > exciting, clean, real, stuff. This attempt to sell JSF has turned Struts > into slogging away at best. > > Struts, in my opinion, by tying itself to the think and the values of a > commercial product has completely lost track of any sense of what is and > what is not open source and what is community. The entry to assisting on > these things as a committer used to be merit based in the sense that you had > some talent and could work with others. Now it is a club based on balancing > the voting blocs. When Ted started, he could just jump in after showing > that he was no fool, and start helping. Those real open source days at > Struts are over at this point. Now any indication that you might actually > make Struts grow or have something new and interesting to offer is a sure > sign that you will be rejected. Things have gotten so bad with this that > the committers had to admit that they essentially had killed Struts and > needed to get some help from some people who really had been doing open > source work. Those people will find, I predict, that they made a mistake > coming here and that the Struts name was not worth it. > > > > On 3/19/06, Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Indeed! Hoo hah! Has anyone asked why Tapestry, which is just JSF done > > > well in my opinion, is causing no difficulties on the Struts list? > > > > Diveristy is important, even those who don't agree with a darwinian > > model seem to agree with this. Trying to push one size fits all would > > seem to reflect an intollerance of ambiguity and perhaps demonstrates > > more about an indiviual's personality traits than a genuine balanced > > opinion. Who really cares that much if this or that framework is > > superiour or not according to this or that principle, blue print > > and/or design pattern. All will be ultimately evaluated in the cold > > light of market forces (including available skills, development > > time/cost, and maintainance). > > > > Here are some of the fallacies that keep comming up > > > > Affirmation of the consequent > > if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less > > and be higher quality, > > the app was built according to x design pattern, > > therefore the app cost less and is of higher quality. > > > > Denial of the antecedent > > if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
Hey that's look like a very good book Gary. I was looking for something new to read so maybe I'll give it a try. Thank :) On 3/19/06, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > > a standard? > > > > *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). > > Gary > -- Alexandre Poitras Québec, Canada - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
>From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF > does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view > and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once > since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't > a standard? > *I* think this is really an argument about moving the cheese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese). Gary
ot: cool os projects
http://www.wilsonresearch.com/2006/ostgawards06/ostgawards4.php .V - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
You keep saying Tapesty "does what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it". I have looked into the two from a technical point of view and I prefered JSF. How about giving some technical arguments for once since you are complaing about logic fallacies? Is it because it isn't a standard? On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I really do see these fallacies coming up at all. The fallacies which > typically come up are ones like: (1) argument ad hominem; (2) appeal to > authority; (3) appeal to common practice; (4) appeal to emotion; (5) appeal > to flattery; (6) appleal to popularity; (7) appeal to riducle; (8) biased > sample. These seem to have a life of their own. Yours are, so far as I can > see, never around. Could you give an example from someone's submission on > this list? > > Tapestry is as diverse as JSF and is in Apache as well as Struts, yet no one > in Struts has ever complained about Tapestry. (Tapestry, by the way, does, > in my opinion, what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it. If JSF should > have tried to "horn in" for branding purposes, Tapestry wo0uld have been a > better choice than Struts.) However, if Craig had tried that, Howard > Lewis-Ship would have made him go through what everyone else goes through, > leading to JSF, inevitably, being show the door. > > This discussion is not about diversity. That is Ted's pronouncement which > is unrelated to the facts. This discussion is about greed and branding and > JSF's difficulties getting a toe hold in the mind and eye of the public, I > don't know of a single soul that does not wish JSF well when it is not > pushed on someone. Ted is right that committers on this list do what they > want to do. And, he is right that the committer clique decided to jump into > bed with Craig and JSF. There are committer feet sticking out all over > under the covers of JSF and Shale. This is not to promote diversity. This > was to serve themselves. That is irresponsible to their elected position. > > Ted's idea that serving an open source community is one way to do your job > is a big part of the problem, not a part of the solution, around here. > Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit > what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. This has been > especially prevalent the last year and a half. Ted finds this perfect. I > think it is an abomination. The motivation for working in open source used > to be more due to a desire to do top quality work, something many bright > people were stopped from doing at work or otherwise frustrated about. Now > my job, I don't know about yours, does more exciting work than anyone at > Struts even has a dream about. Spring and other places are working on > exciting, clean, real, stuff. This attempt to sell JSF has turned Struts > into slogging away at best. > > Struts, in my opinion, by tying itself to the think and the values of a > commercial product has completely lost track of any sense of what is and > what is not open source and what is community. The entry to assisting on > these things as a committer used to be merit based in the sense that you had > some talent and could work with others. Now it is a club based on balancing > the voting blocs. When Ted started, he could just jump in after showing > that he was no fool, and start helping. Those real open source days at > Struts are over at this point. Now any indication that you might actually > make Struts grow or have something new and interesting to offer is a sure > sign that you will be rejected. Things have gotten so bad with this that > the committers had to admit that they essentially had killed Struts and > needed to get some help from some people who really had been doing open > source work. Those people will find, I predict, that they made a mistake > coming here and that the Struts name was not worth it. > > > > On 3/19/06, Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Indeed! Hoo hah! Has anyone asked why Tapestry, which is just JSF done > > > well in my opinion, is causing no difficulties on the Struts list? > > > > Diveristy is important, even those who don't agree with a darwinian > > model seem to agree with this. Trying to push one size fits all would > > seem to reflect an intollerance of ambiguity and perhaps demonstrates > > more about an indiviual's personality traits than a genuine balanced > > opinion. Who really cares that much if this or that framework is > > superiour or not according to this or that principle, blue print > > and/or design pattern. All will be ultimately evaluated in the cold > > light of market forces (including available skills, development > > time/cost, and maintainance). > > > > Here are some of the fallacies that keep comming up > > > > Affirmation of the consequent > > if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less > > and be higher quality, >
Monty Python
Since this is Friday: How about a little Monty Python *Receptionist:* Yes, sir? *Man:* I'd like to have an argument please. *Receptionist:* Certainly, sir, have you been here before...? *Man:* No, this is my first time. *Receptionist:* I see. Do you want to have the full argument, or were you thinking of taking a course? *Man:* Well, what would be the cost? *Receptionist:* Yes, it's one pound for a five-minute argument, but only eight pounds for a course of ten. *Man:* Well, I think it's probably best of I start with the one and see how it goes from there. OK? *Receptionist:* Fine. I'll see who's free at the moment... Mr. Du-Bakey's free, but he's a little bit concilliatory... Yes, try Mr. Barnard -- Room 12. *Man:* Thank you. *[...] The man knocks on the door.* *Mr Vibrating:**(from within)* Come in. *The man enters the room. Mr Vibrating is sitting at a desk.* *Man:* Is this the right room for an argument? *Mr Vibrating:* I've told you *once*. *Man:* No you haven't. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I have. *Man:* When? *Mr Vibrating:* Just now! *Man:* No you didn't. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I did! *Man:* Didn't. *Mr Vibrating:* Did. *Man:* Didn't. *Mr Vibrating:* I'm telling you I did! *Man:* You did not! *Mr Vibrating:* I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half-hour? *Man:* Oh, just a five minute one. *Mr Vibrating:* Fine. *(makes a note of it; the man sits down)* Thank you. Anyway I did. *Man:* You most certainly did not. *Mr Vibrating:* Now, let's get one thing *quite* clear... I most definitely told you! *Man:* You did not. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I did. *Man:* You did not. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I did. *Man:* Didn't. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I did. *Man:* Didn't. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes I did!! *Man:* Look this isn't an argument. *Mr Vibrating:* Yes it is. *Man:* No it isn't, it's just contradiction. *Mr Vibrating:* No it isn't. *Man:* Yes it is. *Mr Vibrating:* It is not. *Man:* It is. You just contradicted me. *Mr Vibrating:* No I didn't. *Man:* Ooh, you did! *Mr Vibrating:* No, no, no, no, no. *Man:* You did, just then. *Mr Vibrating:* No, nonsense! *Man:* Oh, look this is futile. *Mr Vibrating:* No it isn't. *Man:* I came here for a good argument. *Mr Vibrating:* No you didn't, you came here for an *argument.* *Man:* Well, an argument's not the same as contradiction. *Mr Vibrating:* It can be. *Man:* No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a definite proposition. *Mr Vibrating:* No it isn't. *Man:* Yes it is. It isn't just contradiction. *Mr Vibrating:* Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position. *Man:* But it isn't just saying "No it isn't". *Mr Vibrating:* Yes it is. *Man:* No it isn't, an argument is an intellectual process... contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. *Mr Vibrating:* No it isn't. *Man:* Yes it is. *Mr Vibrating:* Not at all. *Man:* Now look! *Mr Vibrating:**(pressing the bell on his desk)* Thank you, good morning. *Man:* What? *Mr Vibrating:* That's it. Good morning. *Man:* But I was just getting interested. *Mr Vibrating:* Sorry the five minutes is up. *Man:* That was never five minutes just now! *Mr Vibrating:* I'm afraid it was. *Man:* No it wasn't. *Mr Vibrating:* I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more. *Man:* What!? *Mr Vibrating:* If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes. *Man:* But that was never five minutes just now... oh come on! *(Vibrating looks round as though man was not there)* This is ridiculous. *Mr Vibrating:* I'm very sorry, but I told you I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid. *Man:* Oh. All right. *(pays)* There you are. *Mr Vibrating:* Thank you. *Man:* Well? *Mr Vibrating:* Well what? *Man:* That was never five minutes just now. *Mr Vibrating:* I told you I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid. *Man:* I've just paid. *Mr Vibrating:* No you didn't. *Man:* I did! I did! I did! *Mr Vibrating:* No you didn't. *Man:* Look I don't want to argue about that. *Mr Vibrating:* Well I'm very sorry but you didn't pay. *Man:* Aha! Well if I didn't pay, why are you arguing... got you! *Mr Vibrating:* No you haven't. *Man:* Yes I have... if you're arguing I must have paid. *Mr Vibrating:* Not necessarily. I *could* be arguing in my spare time. *Man:* I've had enough of this. *Mr Vibrating:* No you haven't. -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
I really do see these fallacies coming up at all. The fallacies which typically come up are ones like: (1) argument ad hominem; (2) appeal to authority; (3) appeal to common practice; (4) appeal to emotion; (5) appeal to flattery; (6) appleal to popularity; (7) appeal to riducle; (8) biased sample. These seem to have a life of their own. Yours are, so far as I can see, never around. Could you give an example from someone's submission on this list? Tapestry is as diverse as JSF and is in Apache as well as Struts, yet no one in Struts has ever complained about Tapestry. (Tapestry, by the way, does, in my opinion, what JSF wants to do better than JSF does it. If JSF should have tried to "horn in" for branding purposes, Tapestry wo0uld have been a better choice than Struts.) However, if Craig had tried that, Howard Lewis-Ship would have made him go through what everyone else goes through, leading to JSF, inevitably, being show the door. This discussion is not about diversity. That is Ted's pronouncement which is unrelated to the facts. This discussion is about greed and branding and JSF's difficulties getting a toe hold in the mind and eye of the public, I don't know of a single soul that does not wish JSF well when it is not pushed on someone. Ted is right that committers on this list do what they want to do. And, he is right that the committer clique decided to jump into bed with Craig and JSF. There are committer feet sticking out all over under the covers of JSF and Shale. This is not to promote diversity. This was to serve themselves. That is irresponsible to their elected position. Ted's idea that serving an open source community is one way to do your job is a big part of the problem, not a part of the solution, around here. Frequently we find developers coding away to make something in Struts fit what they need on the job rather than what Struts needs. This has been especially prevalent the last year and a half. Ted finds this perfect. I think it is an abomination. The motivation for working in open source used to be more due to a desire to do top quality work, something many bright people were stopped from doing at work or otherwise frustrated about. Now my job, I don't know about yours, does more exciting work than anyone at Struts even has a dream about. Spring and other places are working on exciting, clean, real, stuff. This attempt to sell JSF has turned Struts into slogging away at best. Struts, in my opinion, by tying itself to the think and the values of a commercial product has completely lost track of any sense of what is and what is not open source and what is community. The entry to assisting on these things as a committer used to be merit based in the sense that you had some talent and could work with others. Now it is a club based on balancing the voting blocs. When Ted started, he could just jump in after showing that he was no fool, and start helping. Those real open source days at Struts are over at this point. Now any indication that you might actually make Struts grow or have something new and interesting to offer is a sure sign that you will be rejected. Things have gotten so bad with this that the committers had to admit that they essentially had killed Struts and needed to get some help from some people who really had been doing open source work. Those people will find, I predict, that they made a mistake coming here and that the Struts name was not worth it. On 3/19/06, Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Indeed! Hoo hah! Has anyone asked why Tapestry, which is just JSF done > > well in my opinion, is causing no difficulties on the Struts list? > > Diveristy is important, even those who don't agree with a darwinian > model seem to agree with this. Trying to push one size fits all would > seem to reflect an intollerance of ambiguity and perhaps demonstrates > more about an indiviual's personality traits than a genuine balanced > opinion. Who really cares that much if this or that framework is > superiour or not according to this or that principle, blue print > and/or design pattern. All will be ultimately evaluated in the cold > light of market forces (including available skills, development > time/cost, and maintainance). > > Here are some of the fallacies that keep comming up > > Affirmation of the consequent > if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less > and be higher quality, > the app was built according to x design pattern, > therefore the app cost less and is of higher quality. > > Denial of the antecedent > if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less > and be higher quality, > my software didn't cost less and isn't high quality, > therefore it doesn't follow x design pattern. > > I actually agree that certain patterns help facilitate positive > outcomes, but attempting to propose that sucess and failure are merely > a function
Re: [FRIDAY] Re: has struts reached the saturation
On 3/19/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Indeed! Hoo hah! Has anyone asked why Tapestry, which is just JSF done > well in my opinion, is causing no difficulties on the Struts list? Diveristy is important, even those who don't agree with a darwinian model seem to agree with this. Trying to push one size fits all would seem to reflect an intollerance of ambiguity and perhaps demonstrates more about an indiviual's personality traits than a genuine balanced opinion. Who really cares that much if this or that framework is superiour or not according to this or that principle, blue print and/or design pattern. All will be ultimately evaluated in the cold light of market forces (including available skills, development time/cost, and maintainance). Here are some of the fallacies that keep comming up Affirmation of the consequent if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less and be higher quality, the app was built according to x design pattern, therefore the app cost less and is of higher quality. Denial of the antecedent if i create software according to x design pattern is will cost less and be higher quality, my software didn't cost less and isn't high quality, therefore it doesn't follow x design pattern. I actually agree that certain patterns help facilitate positive outcomes, but attempting to propose that sucess and failure are merely a function of choice of framework or the framework's strict adherence to x design pattern is just plain silly. Albeit I've a foot (or perhaps both feet) strongly in the silly camp because I'm engaging in this sort of futile dialogue. Mark > > On 3/18/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> Ted's central principle that "darwin decides" > > > > This is a false principle in the terms of software development. > > You don't have blind forces assembling the source code of Struts, > > but real living people who can see what people want and choose > > to write a solution for it. People decide in ASF, not Darwin. > > If the Commiters want Struts to succeed into the future, they need > > to always have passion and dedication to keep up with the demands > > of the MVC market. Any philosophy which reduces Struts to "a gaggle of > > engineers", I think, is a reductionist viewpoint; the problem is > > much bigger than engineers just wanting to solve problems. That's > > why other ASF projects like Tomcat and Tapestry are big winners and > > continue to be big winners: a passion to to be successful with > > whatever they craft, and a desire to see their projects be the best > > at what they are in the industry. I totally see this passion in Craig's > > work - let's transfer some of that energy into Struts Action Framework... > > and it's finally happening (again) with WW2. > > > > Paul > > > > --- Mark Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I've stayed out of this silly thread up until now, but i guess its > > > time to be silly as well.. > > > > > > Now I imagine that I'll get burned by micheal o'grady (dakota jack) > > > for quoting this, but Ted's central principle that "darwin decides" is > > > a sound one. Its sound because it's also a principle that doesn't > > > state that struts or anything is good because its better or because he > > > influenced a group of people to act in a certain way, but because a > > > technology survives the ecological pressures of the economy and > > > projects that adopt such a approach remain profitable. > > > > > > Now natural selection doesn't produce perfection, even in biology, but > > > what you can be sure if is that any organism that lives today has been > > > begat by organisms that have survived "well enough". If best technical > > > solutions always won then betamax would have won the video wars. > > > > > > While struts is adopted and projects survive the ecological pressures > > > of engineering and economics it will probably survive. If a different > > > technoloy is adopted by other folk and they can knock out projects for > > > less then they will "probably" outlive struts or at least have a > > > better chance. > > > > > > But all these abstract principles of perfection serve very little. > > > From a darwinian perspective a ford motor car is more successful than > > > a ferrari. Now my understanding of the apache development that if > > > solutions (commits, patches etc) are best when they are real world > > > solutions, by facilitating these "adaptations" software is more likey > > > to survive ecological pressures because the adaptations are in direct > > > response to the enviornment in which these products find themselves. > > > > > > The other important factor to have a healthy ecosystem that there is > > > never a single organism/technology that covers all niches. Its also > > > true that in a single ecosystem there are never two organisms that > > > occupy the same niche for very long. This is nature, and I don't see > > > the human activity of software development being
Re: Struts CMS ?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/infonoia .V On 3/18/06, Shshank Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hii, Are there any Content management systems (CMS) which can be easily integrated into Struts based systems ? Presently trying to get things working with lenya. -Shanky - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Alexandre Poitras Québec, Canada - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
