subject:"Re\: Why did Struts development stagnate\?"

Yah, Bart.  You are right.  I apologized and I meant it.

On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >I disagree.  From this discussion I have to assume that Dion knows he is
> not
> >in a position to argue this point and the point is pretty fundamental in
> the
> >community.  I tried being soft on that but he just returns expecting to
> be
> >hand fed.  I am not going to do it.
> >
> >
> No one said anything about hand feeding but a simple "check out chapter
> X of book Y" or "have a look at link Z" is all that would be needed
> rather than just insulting users. This is not a list for experts only,
> it is a list for people to HELP each other, not to belittle and insult
> each other or to act all smug and superior, that helps no one.
>
> I'm reminded of an Irish saying "If you have nothing good to say you
> should say nothing"
>
> Bart "the very green" Busschots
>
> P.S.
> That's green as in Irish, not green as in un-educated.
>
> -
> 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: Why did Struts development stagnate?

I did not say you cannot write decent tests for Struts.  You can write
decent tests for almost anything.  I said one of the main problems with
Struts is the difficulty in testing it.  I don't think that is debatable.
If it is, then I don't want to debate it.  The reasons for that are crystal
clear to me and are well known in the literature.  I have to admit that I
had no idea that you were a long time Struts person.  I was surprised to
hear that.  Have you never come across anything that discussed this before?

On 3/30/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/31/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I am sorry you took this personally, Dion.  I meant nothing about you
> > personally.  I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known
> > in
> > the literature and in fact to be a problem.  This is a main reason why
> > Struts 1.x is being abandoned.  I am not going to take the time to show
> > you
> > something that you should be learning as a matter of course.  I don't
> owe
> > you that.  So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
> > world.  Nothing personal is meant.  Just read more.  That is all I am
> > saying.  Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
> > obligation to teach you.  I have told you the truth.  Check it out.
>
>
> Your original statement I replied to was:
> "For one, try writing decent tests."
>
> Believe it or not, I have done a lot of reading on Struts, been developing
> with Struts for many years (I think it was 1999, in the 0.5 days) and
> understand what it takes to test Struts code very well. I've written
> Struts
> and WebWork apps, and tests for both, many times.
>
> I'm not asking you to teach me anything.
>
> IMHO, you can write decent tests for Struts applications. And I'm happy to
> agree to disagree with you.
>
> On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Ah, personal attack, thanks.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
> > > tests
> > > with Struts 1.x.
> > >
> > > It is.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> > > > low.  Come
> > > > back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do
> this
> > > but
> > > > I
> > > > am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> > > going
> > > > to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> > > that
> > > > you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and
> bow
> > > out
> > > > gracefully.
> > > >
> > > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and
> then
> > > come
> > > > > > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> > > testing
> > > > > > issues?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I do. Do you?
> > > > >
> > > > > So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and
> > > design?
> > > > > Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> > > > > reasonably
> > > > > easily.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts
> 1.xthen
> > > > > stand
> > > > > > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your
> > > code?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized
> > that
> > > > > Struts
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
> > > > wrong.
> > > > > > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this
> list
> > > and
> > > > > > look
> > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > you've just done.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take
> out
> > > > your
> > > > > > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC,
> > not
> > > > > > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the
> > subject
> > > > and
> > > > > > > answer
> > > > > > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wron

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Yes.  I know what stability means and what changing means, Alexandre.  I
don't have to go to a dictionary.  I only go to a dictionary when I don't
know what a word means.

Let me try and get you to see the context.  I was saying that getting the
questions answered about what went wrong was important because people who
were to use Struts need to see it was stable.  This certainly did not mean
that they needed to see that it did not change.  If you think those are
contradictory, then I leave you with that insight.  Myself, I think this
change to the webwork platform promises stability if and only if there are
lessons learned.  If that is contradictory for you, then you can have your
logic and I will keep my own.

On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Stability : Relatively unchanging, permanent; firmly fixed or established,
>
> Of course, it usually only refers to the framework API. It doesn't
> have anything to do with improvements or not, changing is changing for
> the best or the worst.
>
> "There is nothing incompatible between being -->stable<-- and being
> innovative and
> -->changing<--" is totally contradictory according to your favorite
> dictionary.
>
>
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Again, Alexandre, how are these contradictory?  Oh, LOL, I see what you
> are
> > thinking, if I can guess.  You think that code improvement and migration
> are
> > unstable.  Unstable is when you cannot count on a product for the long
> run.
> > This means stability embraces change and improvement, keeping up with
> the
> > Jones.  Look at the big picture.
> >
> > Stability is important.  That does not mean you don't improve.  There is
> > nothing incompatible between being stable and being innovative and
> > changing.  In fact, if a code base does not keep up, it is unstable.  A
> code
> > base is not stable if you cannot count on it for the future.
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yesterday :
> > > "The stability of a platform like Struts is a big deal"
> > > Today :
> > > "Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You go
> > > through a process of deprecation."
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a
> contradiction.  Could
> > > you
> > > > please point that out?
> > > >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :
> > > > >
> > > > > "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform
> with a
> > > > > bunch
> > > > > of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not
> > > willing
> > > > > to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like
> Struts
> > > is a
> > > > > big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the
> > > Struts
> > > > > wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."
> > > > >
> > > > > You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us
> mere
> > > > > mortals that I am probably wrong again.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > > > > > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this
> > > crap.  The
> > > > > truth
> > > > > > > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all
> over
> > > this
> > > > > > > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a
> > > > > product.  You
> > > > > > > go through a process of deprecation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it
> again,
> > > he
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him
> > > several
> > > > > > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some
> books
> > > and
> > > > > > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims.
> I
> > > am
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think
> > > people
> > > > > > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many
> times
> > > he
> > > > > > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like
> > > jalousy
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess
> > > here.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > > > is not an absolute right.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another
> place
> > > > > because
> > > > > > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write
> a
> > > lot on
> > > > > > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting
> > > really
> > > > > out
> > > > > > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't
> fit
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same
> > > > > way  are
> > >

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Dion Gillard

On 3/31/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dion Gillard wrote:
> > On 3/31/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>I am sorry you took this personally, Dion.  I meant nothing about you
> >>personally.  I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known
> >>in
> >>the literature and in fact to be a problem.  This is a main reason why
> >>Struts 1.x is being abandoned.  I am not going to take the time to show
> >>you
> >>something that you should be learning as a matter of course.  I don't
> owe
> >>you that.  So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
> >>world.  Nothing personal is meant.  Just read more.  That is all I am
> >>saying.  Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
> >>obligation to teach you.  I have told you the truth.  Check it out.
>
> Dion,
>
> Finally, I was curious about this question and I just googled the
> keywords:
>
> webwork struts testable
>
> as well as: webwork struts "unit test"
>
> and I get a fair number of hits. You might try similar searches. There
> seem to be various people who think that a significant advantage of
> Webwork is testability -- that actions are testable independently of the
> web container.


Yep,  I understand that it is *easier* to test WW actions. BTDT.

That doesn't preclude you from writing 'decent tests' for your struts
actions, and regardless, if the actions (ww or struts) call EJBs, use JNDI,
JMS, JDBC et al, there's still further work to be done in both cases either
mocking, arranging an in container test, or provide a 'test' spring
configuration.


Here is one blogger who talks about this stuff extensively.
>
>
> http://www.pubbitch.org/blog/2004/10/10/every_time_you_use_struts_god_kills_another_kitten
>
> So, it seems that, at least there are many people who believe that
> Webwork has a significant advantage in terms of being able to unit test
> actions.
>
> OTOH, I personally don't have a sense of how important this aspect of
> things was in the overall Struts vs. Webwork comparison that must have
> been carried out in order to decide to ditch the Struts codebase in
> favor of WW.


Reading http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/roadmap.html , it seems a
similar feature (no HTTP deps for actions) is being considered for Struts
1.3.x and beyond as experimental members. I wont buy into the 'ditch' at
this point, as far as I can tell, Struts 1.2 and 1.3 are actively being
developed.

Most of the basis of my discourse on this -- that Webwork is better than
> Struts -- has been simply taking the Struts people at their word. Why on
> earth would they want to bring in Webwork as Struts Action 2 if it were
> not significantly better than Struts Action 1 (i.e. plain old Struts)?
>
> At this point, strangely enough, certain people are asking *me*
> insistently about all these issues as if I am the one who is supposed to
> explain it.
>
> Anyway, there does seem to be an issue that Webwork has an advantage in
> that the actions are unit testable independently of a web container. I
> do not know how central this was to the decision to bring in Webwork.
> There is terrible communication about this from the Struts developers
> themselves. You'd think they would feel some onus to answer such
> questions. If there are 22 Struts committers who had a say in the
> decision to go with WW, you'd think they wouldn't all go into hiding
> when questions are asked about this stuff.


I see a fair amount of discussion about this stuff on the struts-dev lists,
as they are currently 'development' decisions.

Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Your original statement I replied to was:
> > "For one, try writing decent tests."
> >
> > Believe it or not, I have done a lot of reading on Struts, been
> developing
> > with Struts for many years (I think it was 1999, in the 0.5 days) and
> > understand what it takes to test Struts code very well. I've written
> Struts
> > and WebWork apps, and tests for both, many times.
> >
> > I'm not asking you to teach me anything.
> >
> > IMHO, you can write decent tests for Struts applications. And I'm happy
> to
> > agree to disagree with you.
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>>Ah, personal attack, thanks.
> >>>
> >>>I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
> >>>tests
> >>>with Struts 1.x.
> >>>
> >>>It is.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> low.  Come
> back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this
> >>>
> >>>but
> >>>
> I
> am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> >>>
> >>>going
> >>>
> to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> >>>
> >>>that
> >>>
> you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow
> >

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Jonathan Revusky

Dion Gillard wrote:

On 3/31/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I am sorry you took this personally, Dion. I meant nothing about you
personally. I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known
in
the literature and in fact to be a problem. This is a main reason why
Struts 1.x is being abandoned. I am not going to take the time to show
you
something that you should be learning as a matter of course. I don't owe
you that. So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
world. Nothing personal is meant. Just read more. That is all I am
saying. Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
obligation to teach you. I have told you the truth. Check it out.

Dion,

Finally, I was curious about this question and I just googled the keywords:

webwork struts testable

as well as: webwork struts "unit test"

and I get a fair number of hits. You might try similar searches. There
seem to be various people who think that a significant advantage of
Webwork is testability -- that actions are testable independently of the
web container.

Here is one blogger who talks about this stuff extensively.

http://www.pubbitch.org/blog/2004/10/10/every_time_you_use_struts_god_kills_another_kitten

So, it seems that, at least there are many people who believe that
Webwork has a significant advantage in terms of being able to unit test
actions.

OTOH, I personally don't have a sense of how important this aspect of
things was in the overall Struts vs. Webwork comparison that must have
been carried out in order to decide to ditch the Struts codebase in
favor of WW.

Most of the basis of my discourse on this -- that Webwork is better than
Struts -- has been simply taking the Struts people at their word. Why on
earth would they want to bring in Webwork as Struts Action 2 if it were
not significantly better than Struts Action 1 (i.e. plain old Struts)?

At this point, strangely enough, certain people are asking *me*
insistently about all these issues as if I am the one who is supposed to
explain it.

Anyway, there does seem to be an issue that Webwork has an advantage in
that the actions are unit testable independently of a web container. I
do not know how central this was to the decision to bring in Webwork.
There is terrible communication about this from the Struts developers
themselves. You'd think they would feel some onus to answer such
questions. If there are 22 Struts committers who had a say in the
decision to go with WW, you'd think they wouldn't all go into hiding
when questions are asked about this stuff.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/

Your original statement I replied to was:
"For one, try writing decent tests."

Believe it or not, I have done a lot of reading on Struts, been developing
with Struts for many years (I think it was 1999, in the 0.5 days) and
understand what it takes to test Struts code very well. I've written Struts
and WebWork apps, and tests for both, many times.

I'm not asking you to teach me anything.

IMHO, you can write decent tests for Struts applications. And I'm happy to
agree to disagree with you.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Ah, personal attack, thanks.

I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
tests
with Struts 1.x.

It is.

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Sigh .. Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
low. Come
back later when you are grown up in this business. I hate to do this

but

I
am not going to start at 101 with you. Someone else can. I am not

going

to. You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize

that

you are revealing that in spades. Please do yourself a favor and bow

out

gracefully.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Dion, you are obviously really green. Please read a bit and then

come

back. Do you have any idea about architecture and design and

testing

issues?

Yes, I do. Do you?

So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and

design?

Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
reasonably
easily.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

God, Joe! If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.xthen

stand

aside. For one, try writing decent tests. Do you test your

code?

So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?

On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Jonathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized

that

Struts

and

WebWork merged.
You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is

wrong.

The question was "Do you have a list of
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"

You complain that people don't answer questions on this list

and

look

what

you've

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Bart Busschots


Dakota Jack wrote:


I disagree.  From this discussion I have to assume that Dion knows he is not
in a position to argue this point and the point is pretty fundamental in the
community.  I tried being soft on that but he just returns expecting to be
hand fed.  I am not going to do it.
 

No one said anything about hand feeding but a simple "check out chapter 
X of book Y" or "have a look at link Z" is all that would be needed 
rather than just insulting users. This is not a list for experts only, 
it is a list for people to HELP each other, not to belittle and insult 
each other or to act all smug and superior, that helps no one.


I'm reminded of an Irish saying "If you have nothing good to say you 
should say nothing"


Bart "the very green" Busschots

P.S.
That's green as in Irish, not green as in un-educated.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Dion Gillard

On 3/31/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am sorry you took this personally, Dion.  I meant nothing about you
> personally.  I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known
> in
> the literature and in fact to be a problem.  This is a main reason why
> Struts 1.x is being abandoned.  I am not going to take the time to show
> you
> something that you should be learning as a matter of course.  I don't owe
> you that.  So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
> world.  Nothing personal is meant.  Just read more.  That is all I am
> saying.  Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
> obligation to teach you.  I have told you the truth.  Check it out.


Your original statement I replied to was:
"For one, try writing decent tests."

Believe it or not, I have done a lot of reading on Struts, been developing
with Struts for many years (I think it was 1999, in the 0.5 days) and
understand what it takes to test Struts code very well. I've written Struts
and WebWork apps, and tests for both, many times.

I'm not asking you to teach me anything.

IMHO, you can write decent tests for Struts applications. And I'm happy to
agree to disagree with you.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Ah, personal attack, thanks.
> >
> > I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
> > tests
> > with Struts 1.x.
> >
> > It is.
> >
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> > > low.  Come
> > > back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this
> > but
> > > I
> > > am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> > going
> > > to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> > that
> > > you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow
> > out
> > > gracefully.
> > >
> > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then
> > come
> > > > > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> > testing
> > > > > issues?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I do. Do you?
> > > >
> > > > So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and
> > design?
> > > > Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> > > > reasonably
> > > > easily.
> > > >
> > > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.xthen
> > > > stand
> > > > > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your
> > code?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized
> that
> > > > Struts
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
> > > wrong.
> > > > > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list
> > and
> > > > > look
> > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > you've just done.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out
> > > your
> > > > > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC,
> not
> > > > > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the
> subject
> > > and
> > > > > > answer
> > > > > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong
> with
> > > > Struts
> > > > > > 1.x
> > > > > > > ?"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > -
> > > > > > > > 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~
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > > > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris
> > i

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Stability : Relatively unchanging, permanent; firmly fixed or established,

Of course, it usually only refers to the framework API. It doesn't
have anything to do with improvements or not, changing is changing for
the best or the worst.

"There is nothing incompatible between being -->stable<-- and being
innovative and
-->changing<--" is totally contradictory according to your favorite dictionary.



On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Again, Alexandre, how are these contradictory?  Oh, LOL, I see what you are
> thinking, if I can guess.  You think that code improvement and migration are
> unstable.  Unstable is when you cannot count on a product for the long run.
> This means stability embraces change and improvement, keeping up with the
> Jones.  Look at the big picture.
>
> Stability is important.  That does not mean you don't improve.  There is
> nothing incompatible between being stable and being innovative and
> changing.  In fact, if a code base does not keep up, it is unstable.  A code
> base is not stable if you cannot count on it for the future.
>
> On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Yesterday :
> > "The stability of a platform like Struts is a big deal"
> > Today :
> > "Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You go
> > through a process of deprecation."
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a contradiction.  Could
> > you
> > > please point that out?
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :
> > > >
> > > > "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform with a
> > > > bunch
> > > > of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not
> > willing
> > > > to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like Struts
> > is a
> > > > big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the
> > Struts
> > > > wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."
> > > >
> > > > You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us mere
> > > > mortals that I am probably wrong again.
> > > >
> > > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > > > > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this
> > crap.  The
> > > > truth
> > > > > > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over
> > this
> > > > > > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a
> > > > product.  You
> > > > > > go through a process of deprecation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again,
> > he
> > > > is
> > > > > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him
> > several
> > > > > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books
> > and
> > > > > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I
> > am
> > > > all
> > > > > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think
> > people
> > > > > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times
> > he
> > > > > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like
> > jalousy
> > > > to
> > > > > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess
> > here.
> > > > It
> > > > > > > is not an absolute right.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place
> > > > because
> > > > > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a
> > lot on
> > > > > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting
> > really
> > > > out
> > > > > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit
> > > > their
> > > > > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same
> > > > way  are
> > > > > > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and
> > start
> > > > > > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish
> > fights
> > > > > > > since you will be so successful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.xdidn't
> > > > > > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > > > > > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is
> > one of
> > > > > > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to
> > understand
> > > > ?
> > > > > > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that
> > sending
> > > > an
> > > > > > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a
> > > > neutral
> > > > > > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > > > > > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version
> > 2.0
> > > > .
> > > > > > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked
> > (from

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Again, Alexandre, how are these contradictory?  Oh, LOL, I see what you are
thinking, if I can guess.  You think that code improvement and migration are
unstable.  Unstable is when you cannot count on a product for the long run.
This means stability embraces change and improvement, keeping up with the
Jones.  Look at the big picture.

Stability is important.  That does not mean you don't improve.  There is
nothing incompatible between being stable and being innovative and
changing.  In fact, if a code base does not keep up, it is unstable.  A code
base is not stable if you cannot count on it for the future.

On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yesterday :
> "The stability of a platform like Struts is a big deal"
> Today :
> "Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You go
> through a process of deprecation."
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a contradiction.  Could
> you
> > please point that out?
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :
> > >
> > > "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform with a
> > > bunch
> > > of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not
> willing
> > > to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like Struts
> is a
> > > big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the
> Struts
> > > wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."
> > >
> > > You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us mere
> > > mortals that I am probably wrong again.
> > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > > > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this
> crap.  The
> > > truth
> > > > > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over
> this
> > > > > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a
> > > product.  You
> > > > > go through a process of deprecation.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again,
> he
> > > is
> > > > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him
> several
> > > > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books
> and
> > > > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I
> am
> > > all
> > > > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think
> people
> > > > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times
> he
> > > > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like
> jalousy
> > > to
> > > > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess
> here.
> > > It
> > > > > > is not an absolute right.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place
> > > because
> > > > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a
> lot on
> > > > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting
> really
> > > out
> > > > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit
> > > their
> > > > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same
> > > way  are
> > > > > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and
> start
> > > > > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish
> fights
> > > > > > since you will be so successful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.xdidn't
> > > > > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > > > > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is
> one of
> > > > > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to
> understand
> > > ?
> > > > > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that
> sending
> > > an
> > > > > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a
> > > neutral
> > > > > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > > > > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version
> 2.0
> > > .
> > > > > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked
> (from
> > > what
> > > > > > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always
> enjoyed
> > > > > > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> > > > > > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong
> competition
> > > > > > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence
> is
> > > > > > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Dakota Jack wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and
> then
> > > come
> > > > > > > >back.  Do you have any idea about arc

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Yesterday :
"The stability of a platform like Struts is a big deal"
Today :
"Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You go
through a process of deprecation."

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a contradiction.  Could you
> please point that out?
>
> On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :
> >
> > "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform with a
> > bunch
> > of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not willing
> > to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like Struts is a
> > big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the Struts
> > wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."
> >
> > You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us mere
> > mortals that I am probably wrong again.
> >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this crap.  The
> > truth
> > > > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over this
> > > > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a
> > product.  You
> > > > go through a process of deprecation.
> > > >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he
> > is
> > > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
> > > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
> > > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am
> > all
> > > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
> > > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
> > > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy
> > to
> > > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here.
> > It
> > > > > is not an absolute right.
> > > > >
> > > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place
> > because
> > > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
> > > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really
> > out
> > > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit
> > their
> > > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same
> > way  are
> > > > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
> > > > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
> > > > > since you will be so successful.
> > > > >
> > > > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
> > > > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > > > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
> > > > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand
> > ?
> > > > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending
> > an
> > > > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a
> > neutral
> > > > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > > > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0
> > .
> > > > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from
> > what
> > > > > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
> > > > > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> > > > > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
> > > > > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
> > > > > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > Dakota Jack wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then
> > come
> > > > > > >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> > testing
> > > > > > >issues?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without.
> > The
> > > > > > above post basically boils down to:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some
> > and
> > > > > > then come talk with the big boys"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack,
> > please
> > > > > > explain your point of view so us mere
> > > > > > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug
> > and
> > > > > > superior on people who dissagree with
> > > > > > you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bart.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > -
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

I have no idea, Alexandre, why you think this is a contradiction.  Could you
please point that out?

On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :
>
> "The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform with a
> bunch
> of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not willing
> to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like Struts is a
> big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the Struts
> wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."
>
> You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us mere
> mortals that I am probably wrong again.
>
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this crap.  The
> truth
> > > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over this
> > > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a
> product.  You
> > > go through a process of deprecation.
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he
> is
> > > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
> > > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
> > > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am
> all
> > > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
> > > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
> > > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy
> to
> > > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here.
> It
> > > > is not an absolute right.
> > > >
> > > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place
> because
> > > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
> > > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really
> out
> > > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit
> their
> > > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same
> way  are
> > > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
> > > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
> > > > since you will be so successful.
> > > >
> > > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
> > > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
> > > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand
> ?
> > > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending
> an
> > > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a
> neutral
> > > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0
> .
> > > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from
> what
> > > > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
> > > > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> > > > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
> > > > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
> > > > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
> > > >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Dakota Jack wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then
> come
> > > > > >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> testing
> > > > > >issues?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without.
> The
> > > > > above post basically boils down to:
> > > > >
> > > > > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some
> and
> > > > > then come talk with the big boys"
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack,
> please
> > > > > explain your point of view so us mere
> > > > > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug
> and
> > > > > superior on people who dissagree with
> > > > > you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Bart.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> -
> > > > > 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]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Dion, I have taken another look at my response.  I see that it is too
emotionally laden.  My apologies.  However, on the substantive issues, this
really is a matter of just reading the literature.  If you find any reason
to debate the issue, then I would be happy to do that.  But,  to see what it
takes for a design to be test friendly is a matter that takes more time than
I want to give to you.  Again, my apologies for the language that was too
strong.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ah, personal attack, thanks.
>
> I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
> tests
> with Struts 1.x.
>
> It is.
>
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> > low.  Come
> > back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this
> but
> > I
> > am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> going
> > to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> that
> > you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow
> out
> > gracefully.
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then
> come
> > > > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> testing
> > > > issues?
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I do. Do you?
> > >
> > > So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and
> design?
> > > Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> > > reasonably
> > > easily.
> > >
> > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then
> > > stand
> > > > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your
> code?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that
> > > Struts
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
> > wrong.
> > > > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list
> and
> > > > look
> > > > > > what
> > > > > > > you've just done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out
> > your
> > > > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject
> > and
> > > > > answer
> > > > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with
> > > Struts
> > > > > 1.x
> > > > > > ?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> -
> > > > > > > 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~
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris
> is
> > > > afraid
> > > > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > > back."
> > > > ~Dakota Jack~
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> > afraid
> > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
> of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

You lack memory Dakota, here's what you just wrote yesterday :

"The hullabaloo, Larry, is about the stability of the platform with a bunch
of committers who don't appear to be up to the job and who are not willing
to look at what went wrong.  The stability of a platform like Struts is a
big deal.  This is a time to decide to go with or to get off the Struts
wagon.  How the committers respond has a lot to do with this."

You just contradicted yourself... But you are so superior to us mere
mortals that I am probably wrong again.

> > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  You
> > toadies to the process are the ones that always start this crap.  The truth
> > is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over this
> > question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You
> > go through a process of deprecation.
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he is
> > > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
> > > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
> > > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am all
> > > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
> > > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
> > > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy to
> > > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here. It
> > > is not an absolute right.
> > >
> > > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place because
> > > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
> > > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really out
> > > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit their
> > > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same way  are
> > > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
> > > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
> > > since you will be so successful.
> > >
> > > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
> > > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
> > > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand ?
> > > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending an
> > > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a neutral
> > > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0.
> > > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from what
> > > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
> > > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> > > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
> > > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
> > > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Dakota Jack wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> > > > >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> > > > >issues?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The
> > > > above post basically boils down to:
> > > >
> > > > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and
> > > > then come talk with the big boys"
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please
> > > > explain your point of view so us mere
> > > > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and
> > > > superior on people who dissagree with
> > > > you.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Bart.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > 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]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Alexandre Poitras
> Québec, Canada
>


--
Alexandre Poitras
Québec, Canada

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

I disagree.  From this discussion I have to assume that Dion knows he is not
in a position to argue this point and the point is pretty fundamental in the
community.  I tried being soft on that but he just returns expecting to be
hand fed.  I am not going to do it.

On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
> > Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> low.  Come
> > back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this
> but I
> > am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> going
> > to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> that
> > you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow
> out
> > gracefully.
>
> Dakota, if you think that Dion doesn't understand some particular issue,
> just explain it to him politely. There is no need to question his
> competence or intelligence or any of that. There are lots of things I
> don't know and lots of things you don't know and so on. Basically, I
> feel obliged to point out that this is not helpful at all.
>
> Stepping back a sec, it's understandable that, in the overall context,
> one can get hot under the collar. I have been on the receiving end of an
> extraordinary amount of abuse here, but there is no need to take out
> your frustrations on somebody who, AFAICS, has been pretty reasonable
> and spoken in good faith. (i.e. keep your eye on the ball... ;-))
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> >>>back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> >>>issues?
> >>
> >>
> >>Yes, I do. Do you?
> >>
> >>So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and design?
> >>Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> >>reasonably
> >>easily.
> >>
> >>On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then
> >>
> >>stand
> >>
> >aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?
> 
> 
> 
> So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> 
> 
> On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >>Jonathon,
> >>
> >>You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that
> >>
> >>Struts
> >>
> and
> 
> >>WebWork merged.
> >>You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> >>The question was "Do you have a list of
> >>things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> >>
> >>You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and
> >>>
> >>>look
> >>>
> >what
> >
> >>you've just done.
> >>
> >>So do you have an answer?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> >>>frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> >>>with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> >>
> >>Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and
> 
> answer
> 
> >>the question.The question is:
> >>
> >>"Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with
> >>
> >>Struts
> >>
> 1.x
> 
> >?"
> >
> >>
> >>Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>-
> >>>
> >>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~
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> >>>
> >>>afraid
> >>>
> of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> >>
> >>back."
> >>
> >>>~Dakota Jack~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> >>Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> afraid
> >>of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "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]
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

And we go throught personnal attacks again

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, Alexandre, do you think there are testing problems with Struts 1.x?  Do
> you think I have the obligation to teach the foundation of this well-known
> fact to these folks?  If you know the answer and you are so all-mighty, why
> don't you take the reins?  You are the troll.  That is the fact.  I have
> said nothing personal.  I have merely answered a question and when faced
> with a followup declined to teach fundamental design issues.  You are the
> one being personal.  I find it really laughable that crap like this is
> supported by the committers and stuff like mine is treated as trolling.  You
> toadies to the process are the ones that always start this crap.  The truth
> is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over this
> question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You
> go through a process of deprecation.
>
> On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he is
> > a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
> > times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
> > come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am all
> > for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
> > have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
> > bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy to
> > me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here. It
> > is not an absolute right.
> >
> > Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place because
> > the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
> > this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really out
> > of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit their
> > point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same way  are
> > wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
> > your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
> > since you will be so successful.
> >
> > By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
> > not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> > compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
> > the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand ?
> > For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending an
> > HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a neutral
> > context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> > changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0.
> > WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from what
> > I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
> > because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> > frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
> > coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
> > not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Dakota Jack wrote:
> > >
> > > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> > > >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> > > >issues?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The
> > > above post basically boils down to:
> > >
> > > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and
> > > then come talk with the big boys"
> > >
> > > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please
> > > explain your point of view so us mere
> > > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and
> > > superior on people who dissagree with
> > > you.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Bart.
> > >
> > > -
> > > 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]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
>


--
Alexandre Poitras
Québec, Canada

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

So, Alexandre, do you think there are testing problems with Struts 1.x?  Do
you think I have the obligation to teach the foundation of this well-known
fact to these folks?  If you know the answer and you are so all-mighty, why
don't you take the reins?  You are the troll.  That is the fact.  I have
said nothing personal.  I have merely answered a question and when faced
with a followup declined to teach fundamental design issues.  You are the
one being personal.  I find it really laughable that crap like this is
supported by the committers and stuff like mine is treated as trolling.  You
toadies to the process are the ones that always start this crap.  The truth
is that you don't know shit.  If you did, you would be all over this
question.  Backward compatibility is never a reason to trash a product.  You
go through a process of deprecation.

On 3/30/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he is
> a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
> times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
> come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am all
> for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
> have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
> bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy to
> me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here. It
> is not an absolute right.
>
> Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place because
> the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
> this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really out
> of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit their
> point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same way  are
> wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
> your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
> since you will be so successful.
>
> By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
> not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
> compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
> the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand ?
> For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending an
> HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a neutral
> context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
> changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0.
> WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from what
> I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
> because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
> frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
> coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
> not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.
>
> On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dakota Jack wrote:
> >
> > >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> > >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> > >issues?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The
> > above post basically boils down to:
> >
> > "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and
> > then come talk with the big boys"
> >
> > I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please
> > explain your point of view so us mere
> > mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and
> > superior on people who dissagree with
> > you.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bart.
> >
> > -
> > 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]
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

The literature is replete on these issues.  Struts 1.x is designed without
interfaces and is difficult to test.  I don't owe you anything.  Dion asked
me to note something really wrong with Struts 1.x and I did.  Now he wants
me to teach him about testing and design.  I have to refuse.  I refuse with
you too.  This is not a simple matter to understand and you can check in the
literature.  I would like to point out that I have nothing personal to say
about Dion or you.  You both are just green.  I was green once too.  When I
was green, however, I listened.  Now Dion just says he is so happy with
StrutsTestCase.  Okay!  If you want to stay at that level of knowledge, go
ahead.  I have no obligation to stoop down there with you.

On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> >issues?
> >
> >
> >
> This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The
> above post basically boils down to:
>
> "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and
> then come talk with the big boys"
>
> I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please
> explain your point of view so us mere
> mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and
> superior on people who dissagree with
> you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
> -
> 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: Why did Struts development stagnate?

I am sorry you took this personally, Dion.  I meant nothing about you
personally.  I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known in
the literature and in fact to be a problem.  This is a main reason why
Struts 1.x is being abandoned.  I am not going to take the time to show you
something that you should be learning as a matter of course.  I don't owe
you that.  So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
world.  Nothing personal is meant.  Just read more.  That is all I am
saying.  Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
obligation to teach you.  I have told you the truth.  Check it out.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ah, personal attack, thanks.
>
> I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
> tests
> with Struts 1.x.
>
> It is.
>
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> > low.  Come
> > back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this
> but
> > I
> > am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not
> going
> > to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
> that
> > you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow
> out
> > gracefully.
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then
> come
> > > > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
> testing
> > > > issues?
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I do. Do you?
> > >
> > > So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and
> design?
> > > Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> > > reasonably
> > > easily.
> > >
> > > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then
> > > stand
> > > > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your
> code?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that
> > > Struts
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
> > wrong.
> > > > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list
> and
> > > > look
> > > > > > what
> > > > > > > you've just done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out
> > your
> > > > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject
> > and
> > > > > answer
> > > > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with
> > > Struts
> > > > > 1.x
> > > > > > ?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> -
> > > > > > > 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~
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris
> is
> > > > afraid
> > > > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > > back."
> > > > ~Dakota Jack~
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> > afraid
> > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
> of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
>
>


--
"You can lead a

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Jonathan Revusky


Michael Jouravlev wrote:

On 3/29/06, Graham Reeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Think of it this way: Would you prefer Struts 2.0 to be written from
scratch looking much like WebWork but with all the usual teething
problems/bugs or have the WebWork and Struts merge, gaining a larger
user-developer base (though you may lose some) and miss a lot of the
teething problems?


I'm surprised, Michael. I would have thought the incisive question you 
pose below would be taboo, and that, as such, I might be the only person 
to ever ask something like that. Darned good question in any case...




If Struts project was simply terminated and users were directed to
OpenSymphony, how this would be different for an average user?


It wouldn't be substantially different AFAICS. It would have one clear 
advantage over the current situation though. The Webwork people could 
have been simply improving Webwork for the last so many months instead 
of getting bogged down with ASF stuff -- incubation, getting "mentored" 
in the "Apache Way" and so on.


It seems reasonable to suppose that they would have moved forward 
significantly more than they did over that time period and Webwork would 
be better now than it is.


The other advantage of the scenario you propose is that there wouild be 
complete clarity about what is going on. The current situation is 
extremely confused. Also, it seems that you still have new users 
starting off doing things on top of Struts 1.x, which, you have to think 
they wouldn't be doing if they fully understood what was going on.


Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Jonathan Revusky


Dakota Jack wrote:

Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this low.  Come
back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this but I
am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not going
to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize that
you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow out
gracefully.


Dakota, if you think that Dion doesn't understand some particular issue, 
just explain it to him politely. There is no need to question his 
competence or intelligence or any of that. There are lots of things I 
don't know and lots of things you don't know and so on. Basically, I 
feel obliged to point out that this is not helpful at all.


Stepping back a sec, it's understandable that, in the overall context, 
one can get hot under the collar. I have been on the receiving end of an 
extraordinary amount of abuse here, but there is no need to take out 
your frustrations on somebody who, AFAICS, has been pretty reasonable 
and spoken in good faith. (i.e. keep your eye on the ball... ;-))


Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/



On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
issues?



Yes, I do. Do you?

So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and design?
Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
reasonably
easily.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then


stand


aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?




So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?


On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Jonathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that


Struts


and


WebWork merged.
You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
The question was "Do you have a list of
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"

You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and


look


what


you've just done.

So do you have an answer?




You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
with me. >Jonathan Revusky


Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and


answer


the question.The question is:

"Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with


Struts


1.x


?"



Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]







-


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~





--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is


afraid


of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris





--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its


back."


~Dakota Jack~





--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris






--
"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: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Don't bother about him Bart. I said it and I will say it again, he is
a troll. I tried to have a constructive discussion with him several
times. It always ends up in personal attacks (go read some books and
come back...) but he is the one never backing up his claims. I am all
for freedom of speech and CONSRUCTIVE CRITICISM but I think people
have been REALLY tolerant with him. I can't count how many times he
bashed Craig freely or any other commiters. It sounds like jalousy to
me. Dakota, this list is owned by Apache and you are a guess here. It
is not an absolute right.

Honestly, I begin to think Shale should move to another place because
the amount of noise on this list is terrible. I don't write a lot on
this list but I do read it a lot and this noise is getting really out
of control. Thank to 2 guys who have decided Apache doesn't fit their
point of view and therefore anybody who don't think the same way  are
wrong . Here's a clue : you can take the code, evolve it and start
your own community then quite BUGGING US with your childish fights
since you will be so successful.

By the way, for those who may believe those guys, Struts 1.x didn't
not evolve as fast as WebWork for one reason : API Backward
compatibilit, something very important to frameworks. This is one of
the reason this community is so huge. Is it that hard to understand ?
For instance, it has been well known since a long time that sending an
HttpServletRequest's instance to actions was a bad idea and a neutral
context object should have been used instead but it hasn't been
changed to keep the API consistant. Hence the need for a version 2.0.
WebWork technically already gots it right but always lacked (from what
I heard) a big user community, something Struts has always enjoyed
because of its commitment to backward compatibility. So both
frameworks win in this merge especially given the strong competition
coming from components-oriented frameworks. Technical excellence is
not the only success factor. Only idealists think this way.

On 3/30/06, Bart Busschots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> >back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> >issues?
> >
> >
> >
> This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The
> above post basically boils down to:
>
> "you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and
> then come talk with the big boys"
>
> I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please
> explain your point of view so us mere
> mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and
> superior on people who dissagree with
> you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
> -
> 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]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-30 Thread Bart Busschots


Dakota Jack wrote:


Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
issues?

 

This is an example of the kind of post this list could do without. The 
above post basically boils down to:


"you disagree with me so you must be uneducated, go read up some and 
then come talk with the big boys"


I'm sorry but that is just insulting and most un-helpful. Jack, please 
explain your point of view so us mere
mortals can actually learn something rather than being all smug and 
superior on people who dissagree with

you.

Thanks,

Bart.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Ah, personal attack, thanks.

I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent tests
with Struts 1.x.

It is.


On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
> low.  Come
> back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this but
> I
> am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not going
> to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize that
> you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow out
> gracefully.
>
> On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> > > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> > > issues?
> >
> >
> > Yes, I do. Do you?
> >
> > So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and design?
> > Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> > reasonably
> > easily.
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then
> > stand
> > > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that
> > Struts
> > > > and
> > > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
> wrong.
> > > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and
> > > look
> > > > > what
> > > > > > you've just done.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out
> your
> > > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject
> and
> > > > answer
> > > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with
> > Struts
> > > > 1.x
> > > > > ?"
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > -
> > > > > > 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~
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> > > afraid
> > > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> > back."
> > > ~Dakota Jack~
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> afraid
> > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
>


--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Sigh ..   Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this low.  Come
back later when you are grown up in this business.  I hate to do this but I
am not going to start at 101 with you.  Someone else can.  I am not going
to.  You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize that
you are revealing that in spades.  Please do yourself a favor and bow out
gracefully.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> > back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> > issues?
>
>
> Yes, I do. Do you?
>
> So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and design?
> Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
> reasonably
> easily.
>
> On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then
> stand
> > > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jonathon,
> > > > >
> > > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that
> Struts
> > > and
> > > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> > > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > > >
> > > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and
> > look
> > > > what
> > > > > you've just done.
> > > > >
> > > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> > > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > > >
> > > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and
> > > answer
> > > > > the question.The question is:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with
> Struts
> > > 1.x
> > > > ?"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > -
> > > > > 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~
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> > afraid
> > > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
> back."
> > ~Dakota Jack~
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
> of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
> back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
> issues?


Yes, I do. Do you?

So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and design?
Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it reasonably
easily.

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then stand
> > > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?
> >
> >
> >
> > So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
> >
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jonathon,
> > > >
> > > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts
> > and
> > > > WebWork merged.
> > > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> > > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > > >
> > > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and
> look
> > > what
> > > > you've just done.
> > > >
> > > > So do you have an answer?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> > > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > > >
> > > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and
> > answer
> > > > the question.The question is:
> > > >
> > > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts
> > 1.x
> > > ?"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> -
> > > > 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~
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> > Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
> afraid
> > of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
> ~Dakota Jack~
>
>


--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Dion, you are obviously really green.  Please read a bit and then come
back.  Do you have any idea about architecture and design and testing
issues?

On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then stand
> > aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?
>
>
>
> So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
>
>
> On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Jonathon,
> > >
> > > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts
> and
> > > WebWork merged.
> > > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> > > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> > >
> > > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look
> > what
> > > you've just done.
> > >
> > > So do you have an answer?
> > >
> > >
> > > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> > > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> > >
> > > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and
> answer
> > > the question.The question is:
> > >
> > > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts
> 1.x
> > ?"
> > >
> > >
> > > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > 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~
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
> Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
> of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
>
>


--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Michael Jouravlev

On 3/29/06, Graham Reeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Think of it this way: Would you prefer Struts 2.0 to be written from
> scratch looking much like WebWork but with all the usual teething
> problems/bugs or have the WebWork and Struts merge, gaining a larger
> user-developer base (though you may lose some) and miss a lot of the
> teething problems?

If Struts project was simply terminated and users were directed to
OpenSymphony, how this would be different for an average user?

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then stand
> aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?



So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?


On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Jonathon,
> >
> > You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts and
> > WebWork merged.
> > You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> > The question was "Do you have a list of
> > things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
> >
> > You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look
> what
> > you've just done.
> >
> > So do you have an answer?
> >
> >
> > >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> > >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> > >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
> >
> > Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and answer
> > the question.The question is:
> >
> > "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x
> ?"
> >
> >
> > Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > 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~
>
>


--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

God, Joe!  If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.x then stand
aside.  For one, try writing decent tests.  Do you test your code?

On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jonathon,
>
> You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts and
> WebWork merged.
> You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
> The question was "Do you have a list of
> things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
>
> You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look what
> you've just done.
>
> So do you have an answer?
>
>
> >You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your
> >frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not
> >with me. >Jonathan Revusky
>
> Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and answer
> the question.The question is:
>
> "Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
>
>
> Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
> -
> 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: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Graham Reeds

IIRC there was a list that Craig produced around the time the merger was 
announced of why they were merging and things that in hindsight were 
probably a bad idea (though seemed right at the time).


If you do a search for Craig's many posts you might come up trumps with 
the list.


Think of it this way: Would you prefer Struts 2.0 to be written from 
scratch looking much like WebWork but with all the usual teething 
problems/bugs or have the WebWork and Struts merge, gaining a larger 
user-developer base (though you may lose some) and miss a lot of the 
teething problems?


G.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Vinny

Yes, I am "that" old. 38 and still kicking!

On 3/29/06, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Vinny wrote:
> > > I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
> > > When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
> > > "struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
> > > yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front
> > > ...
> > > The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
> > > debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.
> ...
> > Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
> > Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
> > If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
> > of being more catholic than the pope.
>
> Nice comparison you brought, Vinny. Are you *that* old? ;-) Betamax vs
> VHS is not a background noise, it is a marketing classic. But for a
> person who uses recordable DVDs, it does not really matter who won
> twenty years ago, VHS or Beta.
>
> Michael.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


--
Ghetto Java: http://www.ghettojava.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Joe Moore wrote:

Jonathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts and 
WebWork merged.
You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
The question was "Do you have a list of 
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"


You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look what
you've just done.

So do you have an answer?



You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your  
frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not 
with me. >Jonathan Revusky



Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and answer the 
question.The question is:

"Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"


I have never compiled such a list. If I had worked up such a list, I 
would have shared it with Dion.


However, this is a red herring. I have already explained why.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/





 Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Joe Moore

Jonathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized that Struts and 
WebWork merged.
You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is wrong.
The question was "Do you have a list of 
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"

You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look what
you've just done.

So do you have an answer?


>You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your  
>frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not 
>with me. >Jonathan Revusky

Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the subject and answer the 
question.The question is:

"Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"


 Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Joe Moore wrote:

Dion Gillard wrote:


Jonathan,

do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?


Dion, there is a Struts/Webwork merger afoot whereby the Webwork 
codebase is being donated to ASF to be the basis of the next version of 
Struts, Struts Action Framework 2 or whatever.


The fact that the Webwork codebase is being used as the basis of the 
next version of the framework by the Struts people rather than Struts 
itself basically leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the Struts 
developers themselves consider Webwork to be better technology.



Johnathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. The question was "Do you have a list of 
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"


You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look what
you've just done.


What did I just do? I answered the man's question as well as I could. I 
don't presume to know everything.




So do you have an answer?


Joe, if the Struts people are abandoning work on the Struts 1.x 
codebase, what conclusion am I (or anyone else) to draw?


Ask the Struts people why they don't want to work further on the Struts 
1.x codebase.


Given that basic fact, there's not much reason for me to draw up a list. 
The Struts team is abandoning the Struts 1.x codebase to work on a new 
codebase that is the work of an erstwhile competitor. The Struts 1.x 
codebase is and will be increasingly obsolete technically.


I think there has been very poor communication between developers and 
users here. You guys just seem to be clued out as to what is going on.


You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out your 
frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC, not with me.


Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/



 
Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Dion Gillard wrote:

On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Dion Gillard wrote:


Jonathan,

do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?


Dion, there is a Struts/Webwork merger afoot whereby the Webwork
codebase is being donated to ASF to be the basis of the next version of
Struts, Struts Action Framework 2 or whatever.


Yep, already know that.


I figured that likely. However, I try not to assume too much prior 
knowledge in posts. I originally assumed that everybody here on this 
list knew basic stuff like that and it later became apparent that a lot 
of people don't.




The fact that the Webwork codebase is being used as the basis of the


next version of the framework by the Struts people rather than Struts
itself basically leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the Struts
developers themselves consider Webwork to be better technology.


Not necessarily. 


Well, Shale is a separate matter AFAICS, since it is a completely 
different approach paradigmatically. As regards an action framework with 
roughly the same approach, the fact that the Struts people don't want to 
use their own code as the basis for that does IMO lead to certain 
inescapable conclusions.



There may be many reasons. And as I understand it, the
'next version of the framework by the Struts people' could also be
considered Apache Struts Shale. Quoting Ted H: "The reason Shale is not
Struts 2.x is because there was so much concern about doing things better,
that we ended up with no easy way to pour our old wine into the new bottle.
Many of us can't afford to recode the many large and mature Struts
applications now in production. There has to be a clear and simple way to
get there from here."


The attempt to relabel Webwork as Struts XXX and also Shale as Struts 
XXX strikes me as extremely problematic because it would tend to create 
great confusion (and maybe even anxiety) among existing Struts users as 
to what they are supposed to do now.


However, that is just my opinion. I consider that I am free to express 
it, of course, but it is up to Struts people to sort this stuff out.


It also seems to me that the majority of existing Struts users are quite 
confused or just uninformed about all this.




It's also quite possible that it is easier to use Don's work with Struts Ti,
and combine WebWork than it is to make the same sorts of changes to Struts
1.x. Why reinvent the wheel?


Well, I don't think Webwork is really being combined with anything. It's 
just the same Webwork. It's getting relabelled as Struts something or other.




Also, based on your reasoning, the Webwork developers themselves must
consider Struts a more widely adopted, better marketed technology, with far
more developer acceptance and corporate penetration.


The above is not a matter of debate AFAICS. If it weren't for this 
mechanism, there would be no reason for the Webwork people to want to 
become part of this community. That is fairly obvious.



As far as the exact technicalities, I can only do what you can do, which


is look in google for discussions about this. A google search on:

struts webwork comparisons

yields a lot of hits, but the first result is this one:

http://wiki.opensymphony.com/display/WW/Comparison+to+Struts

Obviously, not totally objective, since it is by the WW people, but
probably factual enough. You get various blog entries and you can ask
these people, who surely know a lot more than I do.

The truth is out there (somewhere).


Truth being subjective opinion, yes.

"Is WebWork better' technology?" is a subjective question with people on
both sides of the fence.


It appears that the Struts people are conceding that Webwork is the 
better technology -- vis-a-vis Struts 1.x, I don't mean Shale, which is 
almost orthogonal. (You see how confusing this gets...)


But to basically relabel the current version of Webwork as Struts Action 
2 is basically to concede that Webwork is more advanced technology.




What the merger brings us as users is the ability to pick up some of the
better features of WebWork without necessarily taking the hit/cost of
'switching'. 


Well, this is only the case if they provide some compatibility layer or 
migration/conversion tools. All of that, for the moment (correct me, 
someone, if I'm wrong) is just vaporware. I have also been surprised by 
the seeming lack of migration-related threads on the struts-user list.


But, for the moment anyway, switching from using Struts 1.x to Struts 
Action 2 is the same work as switching to Webwork would have been.



There's been much talk about bridging SAF1 and 2, and I expect
with such a huge install base, this will be a big deal to the Struts
developers.


Well, it remains to be seen what will happen. I have expressed general 
concerns that what this represents is negative in terms of open source 
ecology in general, since you have the team that failed to innovate 
absorbing, and imposing their culture and pr

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Joe Moore

>Dion Gillard wrote:
>> Jonathan,
>> 
>> do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?
>
>Dion, there is a Struts/Webwork merger afoot whereby the Webwork 
>codebase is being donated to ASF to be the basis of the next version of 
>Struts, Struts Action Framework 2 or whatever.
>
>The fact that the Webwork codebase is being used as the basis of the 
>next version of the framework by the Struts people rather than Struts 
>itself basically leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the Struts 
>developers themselves consider Webwork to be better technology.

Johnathon,

You didn't answer Dion's question. The question was "Do you have a list of 
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"

You complain that people don't answer questions on this list and look what
you've just done.

So do you have an answer?

 
Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Michael Jouravlev

On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vinny wrote:
> > I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
> > When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
> > "struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
> > yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front
> > ...
> > The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
> > debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.
...
> Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
> Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
> If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
> of being more catholic than the pope.

Nice comparison you brought, Vinny. Are you *that* old? ;-) Betamax vs
VHS is not a background noise, it is a marketing classic. But for a
person who uses recordable DVDs, it does not really matter who won
twenty years ago, VHS or Beta.

Michael.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dion Gillard wrote:
> > Jonathan,
> >
> > do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?
>
> Dion, there is a Struts/Webwork merger afoot whereby the Webwork
> codebase is being donated to ASF to be the basis of the next version of
> Struts, Struts Action Framework 2 or whatever.


Yep, already know that.

The fact that the Webwork codebase is being used as the basis of the
> next version of the framework by the Struts people rather than Struts
> itself basically leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the Struts
> developers themselves consider Webwork to be better technology.


Not necessarily. There may be many reasons. And as I understand it, the
'next version of the framework by the Struts people' could also be
considered Apache Struts Shale. Quoting Ted H: "The reason Shale is not
Struts 2.x is because there was so much concern about doing things better,
that we ended up with no easy way to pour our old wine into the new bottle.
Many of us can't afford to recode the many large and mature Struts
applications now in production. There has to be a clear and simple way to
get there from here."

It's also quite possible that it is easier to use Don's work with Struts Ti,
and combine WebWork than it is to make the same sorts of changes to Struts
1.x. Why reinvent the wheel?

Also, based on your reasoning, the Webwork developers themselves must
consider Struts a more widely adopted, better marketed technology, with far
more developer acceptance and corporate penetration.

As far as the exact technicalities, I can only do what you can do, which
> is look in google for discussions about this. A google search on:
>
> struts webwork comparisons
>
> yields a lot of hits, but the first result is this one:
>
> http://wiki.opensymphony.com/display/WW/Comparison+to+Struts
>
> Obviously, not totally objective, since it is by the WW people, but
> probably factual enough. You get various blog entries and you can ask
> these people, who surely know a lot more than I do.
>
> The truth is out there (somewhere).


Truth being subjective opinion, yes.

"Is WebWork better' technology?" is a subjective question with people on
both sides of the fence.

What the merger brings us as users is the ability to pick up some of the
better features of WebWork without necessarily taking the hit/cost of
'switching'. There's been much talk about bridging SAF1 and 2, and I expect
with such a huge install base, this will be a big deal to the Struts
developers.

I hope that helps.
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
>
> >
> > On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Vinny wrote:
> >>
> >>>There have been many time in history when an individual
> >>>catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope.
> >>>I am simply giving my opinion.
> >>
> >>Well, that's true, I guess. You've got a point there, Vinny.
> >>
> >>So, yeah, feel free. Be more catholic than the pope. Keep maintaining
> >>that Struts 1.x is great stuff after the Struts developers themselves
> >>have abandoned it in favor of Webwork.
> >>
> >>Jonathan Revusky
> >>--
> >>lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> Vinny wrote:
> 
> 
> >I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
> >When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
> >"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
> >yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,
> 
> That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here
> in
> the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"
> 
> Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data --
> "Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge
> user community and so on and so forth as documented above"
> 
> 
> 
> >I don't think that is even debatable.
> 
> Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the
> debate.
> 
> 
> 
> >Now if we want to talk about
> >technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point.
> 
> It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that
> the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base
> "Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.
> 
> 
> 
> >I can't comment
> >on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
> >experiments first.
> 
> Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
> Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically
> better.
> If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the
> position
> of being more catholic than the pope.
> 
> Jonathan R

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Dion Gillard wrote:

Jonathan,

do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?


Dion, there is a Struts/Webwork merger afoot whereby the Webwork 
codebase is being donated to ASF to be the basis of the next version of 
Struts, Struts Action Framework 2 or whatever.


The fact that the Webwork codebase is being used as the basis of the 
next version of the framework by the Struts people rather than Struts 
itself basically leads to the unavoidable conclusion that the Struts 
developers themselves consider Webwork to be better technology.


As far as the exact technicalities, I can only do what you can do, which 
is look in google for discussions about this. A google search on:


struts webwork comparisons

yields a lot of hits, but the first result is this one:

http://wiki.opensymphony.com/display/WW/Comparison+to+Struts

Obviously, not totally objective, since it is by the WW people, but 
probably factual enough. You get various blog entries and you can ask 
these people, who surely know a lot more than I do.


The truth is out there (somewhere).

I hope that helps.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/




On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Vinny wrote:


There have been many time in history when an individual
catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope.
I am simply giving my opinion.


Well, that's true, I guess. You've got a point there, Vinny.

So, yeah, feel free. Be more catholic than the pope. Keep maintaining
that Struts 1.x is great stuff after the Struts developers themselves
have abandoned it in favor of Webwork.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/







On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Vinny wrote:



I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,


That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in
the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"

Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data --
"Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge
user community and so on and so forth as documented above"




I don't think that is even debatable.


Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate.




Now if we want to talk about
technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point.


It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that
the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base
"Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.




I can't comment
on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
experiments first.


Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
of being more catholic than the pope.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/




To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs


Kerry


debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.

On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Niall Pemberton wrote:




- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM






It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
well-formulated question.

Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question


really


is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.




The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and


offered one


perspective) in an earlier thread:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903

However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story


-


clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
volunteer effort as well.


Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was


an


all-volunteer effort and so on.

This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.





We currently have 22 committers on Struts -


Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.





but levels of activity vary
widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to


drive a


project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer


have an


interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons.


People such


as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see


that as


the future for web develo

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

Jonathan,

do you have a list of things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?

On 3/30/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Vinny wrote:
> > There have been many time in history when an individual
> > catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope.
> > I am simply giving my opinion.
>
> Well, that's true, I guess. You've got a point there, Vinny.
>
> So, yeah, feel free. Be more catholic than the pope. Keep maintaining
> that Struts 1.x is great stuff after the Struts developers themselves
> have abandoned it in favor of Webwork.
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Vinny wrote:
> >>
> >>>I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
> >>>When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
> >>>"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
> >>>yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,
> >>
> >>That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in
> >>the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"
> >>
> >>Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data --
> >>"Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge
> >>user community and so on and so forth as documented above"
> >>
> >>
> >>>I don't think that is even debatable.
> >>
> >>Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Now if we want to talk about
> >>>technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point.
> >>
> >>It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that
> >>the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base
> >>"Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I can't comment
> >>>on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
> >>>experiments first.
> >>
> >>Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
> >>Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
> >>If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
> >>of being more catholic than the pope.
> >>
> >>Jonathan Revusky
> >>--
> >>lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
> >>
> >>
> >>>To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
> >>>The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs
> Kerry
> >>>debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.
> >>>
> >>>On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> 
> 
> >- Original Message -
> >From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
> >>well-formulated question.
> >>
> >>Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
> >>off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question
> really
> >>is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.
> >
> >
> >
> >The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and
> offered one
> >perspective) in an earlier thread:
> >
> >http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903
> >
> >However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story
> -
> >clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
> >volunteer effort as well.
> 
> Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was
> an
> all-volunteer effort and so on.
> 
> This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.
> 
> 
> 
> >We currently have 22 committers on Struts -
> 
> Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
> people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.
> 
> 
> 
> >but levels of activity vary
> >widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to
> drive a
> >project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer
> have an
> >interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons.
> People such
> >as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see
> that as
> >the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate
> their
> >effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti
> 
> Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
> complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit
> assumption
> there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
> complete rewrite?
> 
> 
> 
> >and had the
> >offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be
> seeing the
> >fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "st

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Vinny wrote:

There have been many time in history when an individual
catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope.
I am simply giving my opinion.


Well, that's true, I guess. You've got a point there, Vinny.

So, yeah, feel free. Be more catholic than the pope. Keep maintaining 
that Struts 1.x is great stuff after the Struts developers themselves 
have abandoned it in favor of Webwork.


Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/







On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Vinny wrote:


I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,


That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in
the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"

Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data --
"Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge
user community and so on and so forth as documented above"



I don't think that is even debatable.


Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate.



Now if we want to talk about
technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point.


It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that
the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base
"Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.



I can't comment
on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
experiments first.


Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
of being more catholic than the pope.

Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/



To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.

On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Niall Pemberton wrote:



- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM





It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
well-formulated question.

Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.




The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
perspective) in an earlier thread:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903

However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
volunteer effort as well.


Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an
all-volunteer effort and so on.

This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.




We currently have 22 committers on Struts -


Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.




but levels of activity vary
widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive a
project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have an
interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People such
as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate their
effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti


Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption
there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
complete rewrite?




and had the
offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing the
fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it I
believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether we
as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem that
proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Vinny

There have been many time in history when an individual
catholic _has_ been more catholic than the Pope.
I am simply giving my opinion.




On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vinny wrote:
> > I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
> > When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
> > "struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
> > yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,
>
> That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in
> the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"
>
> Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data --
> "Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge
> user community and so on and so forth as documented above"
>
> > I don't think that is even debatable.
>
> Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate.
>
> > Now if we want to talk about
> > technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point.
>
> It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that
> the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base
> "Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.
>
> > I can't comment
> > on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
> > experiments first.
>
> Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base
> Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better.
> If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position
> of being more catholic than the pope.
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
>
> > To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
> > The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
> > debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.
> >
> > On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Niall Pemberton wrote:
> >>
> >>>- Original Message -
> >>>From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
> well-formulated question.
> 
> Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
> off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
> is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
> >>>perspective) in an earlier thread:
> >>>
> >>>http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903
> >>>
> >>>However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
> >>>clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
> >>>volunteer effort as well.
> >>
> >>Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an
> >>all-volunteer effort and so on.
> >>
> >>This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.
> >>
> >>
> >>>We currently have 22 committers on Struts -
> >>
> >>Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
> >>people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.
> >>
> >>
> >>>but levels of activity vary
> >>>widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive a
> >>>project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have 
> >>>an
> >>>interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People 
> >>>such
> >>>as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
> >>>the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate their
> >>>effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti
> >>
> >>Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
> >>complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption
> >>there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
> >>complete rewrite?
> >>
> >>
> >>>and had the
> >>>offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing 
> >>>the
> >>>fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
> >>>this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
> >>>which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
> >>>this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
> >>>people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
> >>>know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
> >>>framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
> >>>certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it 
> >>>I
> >>>believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
> >>>shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether 
> >>>we
> >>>as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've ne

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Vinny wrote:

I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,


That's a different question entirely. The question posed up top here in 
the subject line is: "Why did Struts development stagnate?"


Actually, you could append to that question, given this above data -- 
"Why did Struts development stagnate -- *despite* having such a huge 
user community and so on and so forth as documented above"



I don't think that is even debatable.


Well, I don't either. That's why that is not the subject of the debate.


Now if we want to talk about
technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point. 


It was about technical prowess. "Struts development" -- the fact that 
the Struts developers have abandoned the 1.x codebase decided to base 
"Struts Action 2" on the Webwork codebase.



I can't comment
on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
experiments first.


Well, look, Vinny, if the Struts developers themselves prefer to base 
Struts 2 on Webwork, they are saying that Webwork is technically better. 
If you want to defend Struts 1.x after that, then you're in the position 
of being more catholic than the pope.


Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/


To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.

On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Niall Pemberton wrote:


- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM




It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
well-formulated question.

Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.




The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
perspective) in an earlier thread:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903

However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
volunteer effort as well.


Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an
all-volunteer effort and so on.

This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.



We currently have 22 committers on Struts -


Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.



but levels of activity vary
widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive a
project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have an
interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People such
as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate their
effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti


Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption
there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
complete rewrite?



and had the
offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing the
fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it I
believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether we
as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem that
proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts sucks
because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it better".
Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at existing ones
and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" question
though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking at the
door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I believe
its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, are
helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list), been
aro

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Srinivas Jadcharla

Jonathan Revusky is a Sick Man.Guys please don't respond to his posts.Jonathan
if you don't like struts don't use it ...Is any one commenting on your
framework(freemaker)??Its upto the people who manages the Struts Mailing
List to remove him from the List(or block him)


On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM
> >
> >
> >>It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
> >>well-formulated question.
> >>
> >>Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
> >>off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
> >>is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.
> >
> >
> >
> > The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered
> one
> > perspective) in an earlier thread:
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903
> >
> > However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
> > clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
> > volunteer effort as well.
>
> Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an
> all-volunteer effort and so on.
>
> This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.
>
> >
> > We currently have 22 committers on Struts -
>
> Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
> people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.
>
> > but levels of activity vary
> > widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to
> drive a
> > project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer
> have an
> > interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People
> such
> > as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that
> as
> > the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate
> their
> > effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti
>
> Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
> complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption
> there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
> complete rewrite?
>
> > and had the
> > offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing
> the
> > fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
> > this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a
> while
> > which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I
> guess
> > this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
> > people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
> > know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
> > framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
> > certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of
> it I
> > believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
> > shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility.
> Whether we
> > as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem
> that
> > proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts
> sucks
> > because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it better".
> > Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at existing
> ones
> > and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" question
> > though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking at
> the
> > door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I
> believe
> > its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, are
> > helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list),
> been
> > around a while and don't start flame wars or attack people personally -
> then
> > you get asked. Theres probably 2/3 people who probably think they should
> > have been asked, but haven't - they may or may no have a point - but
> besides
> > them I don't see it as a case of Struts excluding people and I don't
> have an
> > explanation for why there are not hoards of people wanting to join.
>
> Well, first of all, on the question of people going off and doing their
> own framework, you have to basically figure that some of these people
> just didn't think that they could apply their ideas in this setting. If
> somebody with a fire in their belly and some innovative ideas had showed
> up here and wanted to work on that, would they have been able to do so?
>
> After all, the fact remains that everybody knows that any work they do
> under the ASF umbrella will get much more attention and usage than it
> would otherwise. This is the main (probably the only) reason that the
> Webwork people have come here. So, a priori, your saying that you aren't
> attracting collaborators is really quite odd, isn't

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

2006-03-29 Thread Vinny

I still say that struts 1.x has not "lost" to webwork.
When I do a quick unscientific search on monster.com for
"struts" I get over 1000 jobs listed. The same search for "webwork"
yields 22 jobs. Apparently struts "won" on the business front,
I don't think that is even debatable. Now if we want to talk about
technical prowess then maybe Jonathan might have a point. I can't comment
on it because like a good little scientist I'd like to do some
experiments first.
To me this seems like a nice merger that benefits both projects.
The betamax vs VHS , RISC vs CISC, frameworkC vs frameworkD, Bush vs Kerry
debates are  rapidly becoming background noise to me.

On 3/29/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM
> >
> >
> >>It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
> >>well-formulated question.
> >>
> >>Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
> >>off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
> >>is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.
> >
> >
> >
> > The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
> > perspective) in an earlier thread:
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903
> >
> > However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
> > clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
> > volunteer effort as well.
>
> Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an
> all-volunteer effort and so on.
>
> This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.
>
> >
> > We currently have 22 committers on Struts -
>
> Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22
> people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.
>
> > but levels of activity vary
> > widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive a
> > project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have an
> > interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People such
> > as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
> > the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate their
> > effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti
>
> Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a
> complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption
> there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a
> complete rewrite?
>
> > and had the
> > offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing the
> > fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
> > this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
> > which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
> > this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
> > people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
> > know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
> > framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
> > certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it I
> > believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
> > shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether we
> > as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem that
> > proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts sucks
> > because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it better".
> > Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at existing ones
> > and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" question
> > though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking at the
> > door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I believe
> > its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, are
> > helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list), been
> > around a while and don't start flame wars or attack people personally - then
> > you get asked. Theres probably 2/3 people who probably think they should
> > have been asked, but haven't - they may or may no have a point - but besides
> > them I don't see it as a case of Struts excluding people and I don't have an
> > explanation for why there are not hoards of people wanting to join.
>
> Well, first of all, on the question of people going off and doing their
> own framework, you have to basically figure that some of these people
> just didn't think that they could apply their ideas in this setting. If
> somebody with a fire in their belly and some innovative ideas had showed
> up here and wanted to work on that, would they have been able to do so?

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?


Niall Pemberton wrote:
- Original Message - 
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM



It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
well-formulated question.

Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.




The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
perspective) in an earlier thread:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903

However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
volunteer effort as well.


Yes, the bulk of your explanation there seemed to be that Struts was an 
all-volunteer effort and so on.


This could not possibly be why it fell behind Webwork.



We currently have 22 committers on Struts - 


Out of curiosity, what is your rough guess as to how many of these 22 
people committed any code in the last... year, let's say.



but levels of activity vary
widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive a
project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have an
interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People such
as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate their
effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti 


Well, I was not aware of this. However, you mean that Struts TI was a 
complete rewrite of the framework? I mean, was there a tacit assumption 
there that Struts 1.x could not be evolved forward and required a 
complete rewrite?



and had the
offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing the
fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it I
believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether we
as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem that
proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts sucks
because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it better".
Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at existing ones
and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" question
though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking at the
door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I believe
its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, are
helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list), been
around a while and don't start flame wars or attack people personally - then
you get asked. Theres probably 2/3 people who probably think they should
have been asked, but haven't - they may or may no have a point - but besides
them I don't see it as a case of Struts excluding people and I don't have an
explanation for why there are not hoards of people wanting to join.


Well, first of all, on the question of people going off and doing their 
own framework, you have to basically figure that some of these people 
just didn't think that they could apply their ideas in this setting. If 
somebody with a fire in their belly and some innovative ideas had showed 
up here and wanted to work on that, would they have been able to do so?


After all, the fact remains that everybody knows that any work they do 
under the ASF umbrella will get much more attention and usage than it 
would otherwise. This is the main (probably the only) reason that the 
Webwork people have come here. So, a priori, your saying that you aren't 
attracting collaborators is really quite odd, isn't it?


The thing is, Niall, that pretty much all the times you get a new 
collaborator, that person was first a user. Typically that someone is a 
"power user", and is pushing the limits of what the tool can do, and 
starts donating code to make the tool more powerful, and next thing you 
know, the guy is a collaborator.


Now, you've got a lot of users, so that this basic mechanism doesn't 
operate is rather odd.


What I have noticed is that the communication with your user community 
is rather poor. Basically, for all of it, the bulk of your users seem 
completely clued out as to what is going on w

Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?

What a breath of fresh air.  THANK YOU, Niall.  I hoped that if we stuck to
our guns someone would come forward and begin a real discussion.  I don't
have time to consider your points in detail now but will later.  Again, this
is a positive thing.  A beginning.

On 3/29/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:27 PM
>
> > It still seems broadly on-topic to me. It's certainly a legitimate,
> > well-formulated question.
> >
> > Seriously, the only other possibility I see is struts-dev. If it's
> > off-topic on both struts-user and struts-dev, then the question really
> > is (as I am starting to suppose) basically taboo.
>
>
> The question isn't taboo - I posed the same kind of thing (and offered one
> perspective) in an earlier thread:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/122903
>
> However I don't think what I said in that thread was the whole story -
> clearly frameworks such as WebWork succeeded and I assume they were a
> volunteer effort as well.
>
> We currently have 22 committers on Struts - but levels of activity vary
> widely and I would say that the type of talented people it takes to drive
> a
> project forward (and I don't include myself in that group) no longer have
> an
> interest in doing so on the Action 1 side - for various reasons. People
> such
> as Craig put their effort into developing the JSF standard and see that as
> the future for web development and that is where they now concentrate
> their
> effort. Don was doing alot of work inovating with Struts Ti and had the
> offer to merge not come along from WebWork - we would probably be seeing
> the
> fruits of his efforts as Action2 and not even discussing "stagnation" at
> this point. Ted was AWOL doing C# for a while (hes been "back" for a while
> which is good :-), Martin seems focused on javascript etc. etc. So I guess
> this leads to the next question "Well why didn't we attract new talented
> people into the project that would drive Struts forward?" This I don't
> know - seems that lots of people decided to go invent their own web
> framework (YAWF) rather than get involved with Struts. Some of that is
> certainly their own egos being the "founder of a framework" and some of it
> I
> believe is the compatibility issue - its far easier to write a brand new
> shiny web framework when not hampered by backwards compatibility. Whether
> we
> as a community "put them off" I have no knowledge - but I've never seem
> that
> proferred anywhere as a reason. It was always something like "Struts sucks
> because of x, y and z and my brand new shiny framework does it better".
> Course its far easier to invent a new framework by looking at existing
> ones
> and seeing how you can improve them. Back to the "new people" question
> though - its not my perspective that we have lots of people knocking at
> the
> door trying to give us contributions and we're turning them away. I
> believe
> its easy to become a Struts committer - you offer reasonable code, are
> helpful in the community (e.g. answering questions on the user list), been
> around a while and don't start flame wars or attack people personally -
> then
> you get asked. Theres probably 2/3 people who probably think they should
> have been asked, but haven't - they may or may no have a point - but
> besides
> them I don't see it as a case of Struts excluding people and I don't have
> an
> explanation for why there are not hoards of people wanting to join.
>
> Another answer to the question is "it hasn't stagnated - we've moved on to
> Shale" and that is the future for existing Struts users. Clearly there are
> quite a few people that will disagree with this - but also alot that will
> say "great I buy JSF as the future and I'm glad the Struts project has an
> offering that supports this".
>
> At the end of the day though this does seem academic - since we now have
> two
> offering for whatever camp you fall into (component orientated or action
> orientated) and from my point of view the really good thing about the
> WebWork merger is not only the great software were getting - but also the
> talented new blood thats coming into the project.
>
> So I've given my answer to the question - now can we let this list get
> back
> to helping and answering user questions - which is its main purpose?
>
> Niall
>
>
>
> -
> 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: Why did Struts development stagnate?