Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Alexandre Poitras 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. Well, actually, there are concepts of *dynamic* stability -- for example, the notion of an aircraft being aerodynamically stable. I'm not an expert in that field so I am reluctant to take this analogy too far, but obviously, the aircraft is moving, it is not stationary. The stability in question is more or less that it doesn't go into an abrupt nosedive and crash. But it is moving. And it's stable, at least in a certain sense, at the same time. In any case, in the context of this discussion, stability really only makes sense within a framework of overall technical progress. If development basically comes to a standstill, and there's no technical progress, then you have stability in the most trivial sense, that nothing happens. This same stability could have been achieved by the javasoft team simply by not improving the Java platform past the 1.1.3 level, say. To achieve stability by simply not doing anything is hardly much of an achievement to crow about. In any case, there is a concept of dynamic stability. You seem to be confusing the concept of something being stable with it being stationary. In so doing, you have entered into a rather sterile semantic game IMO. Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ 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
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Well said. On 4/1/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexandre Poitras 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. Well, actually, there are concepts of *dynamic* stability -- for example, the notion of an aircraft being aerodynamically stable. I'm not an expert in that field so I am reluctant to take this analogy too far, but obviously, the aircraft is moving, it is not stationary. The stability in question is more or less that it doesn't go into an abrupt nosedive and crash. But it is moving. And it's stable, at least in a certain sense, at the same time. In any case, in the context of this discussion, stability really only makes sense within a framework of overall technical progress. If development basically comes to a standstill, and there's no technical progress, then you have stability in the most trivial sense, that nothing happens. This same stability could have been achieved by the javasoft team simply by not improving the Java platform past the 1.1.3 level, say. To achieve stability by simply not doing anything is hardly much of an achievement to crow about. In any case, there is a concept of dynamic stability. You seem to be confusing the concept of something being stable with it being stationary. In so doing, you have entered into a rather sterile semantic game IMO. Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ 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
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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 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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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 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] -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~
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] 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
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 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
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 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
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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 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,
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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?
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 just done. So do you
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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 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
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 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
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 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
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?
- 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]
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Given the question, how to avoid a duplication of the past failure of Struts to keep up with technological innovations, I would say it should be: People in grass houses should not stow thrones. snip On 3/26/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig McClanahan wrote: As regards this throwaway ad-hominem stuff about my rude and obnoxious behavior, people in glass houses really should not throw stones. /snip -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~
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?
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 with the Webwork
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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? 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
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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 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
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 around a while and don't start flame
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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 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
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 like Struts sucks because of x, y
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 development and that is where
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 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
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
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?
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?
management practices on the team that did innovate. (Like... does this really make sense???) In a messages a few messages before in this thread, I think Al Erdani characterized fairly well how this flamey thread came about. Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/ 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 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
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?
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: 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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. So where should such a question be asked, Craig? On rec.automotive? On alt.politics.libertarian? 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. What does the mailing list description for the dev list say? Subscribe to this mailing list to communicate with other developers interested in expanding and improving the functionality supported by Struts itself. Well, you know, one thing about this just occurred ot me. You, Craig, have, during the time I have been here, made various posts to this list that are off-topic by the narrow definition above. Let's consider this one: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/123252 How was this post of yours remotely on topic to this list? At least given the description you post above. How about this one? http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.struts.user/123253 It is obvious that you yourself do not follow that strictly the supposed rule above as to what is on-topic here. So this is basically red herring. Besides, let us consider the following conceptual experiment. Suppose this thread contained nothing but unctuous praise and flattery for the Struts team, as in: I just want to thank Craig and the rest of the team for doing such a great job. By the definition of the list given above, such posts would be just as off-topic. Does anybody here think you would be trying to shut down such a thread? It really should be quite obvious to anybody that you want to shut down the thread because people are saying things that you don't like, not because of any real issue of it being off-topic. And that is simply not legitimate. So I guess it depends on your goals :-). So, cutting to the chase, if I pose the same question on struts-dev, you and the others would answer it? It wouldn't get rejected as off topic, but your rude and obnoxious behavior has made me, speaking for myself, totally uninterested in whether you ever receive closure on it. So I'll most likely just ignore you there as well as here. Okay, so you won't answer the question there either. So this is further proof that the issue of it being off-topic for struts-user was a dishonest pretext. Well, that's it then. I guess this conversation is over. You have completely discredited yourself. Congratulations. I just have a couple more points. As regards this throwaway ad-hominem stuff about my rude and obnoxious behavior, people in glass houses really should not throw stones. My own sense of things is that people have been incredibly rude and obnoxious to me. I'm not talking just about yahoos jumping out of the woodwork screaming at me to shut up. This includes people who you'd think should be on their best behavior here, since they are Struts PMC members, like James Mitchell, say. There was no sign, for example, that you disapproved of James Mitchell insulting me as a result of my offering honest feedback on your website. I think that, in this discussion, people willing to have a good-faithed discussion with me have found that, while I am a hard debater, I debate fair and square and I maintain a civil tone. In the cases where my tone becomes rude, I think you'll find it was because other people were rude first. I am actually rather inured to the rudeness issues, it's just that you brought this up. What bothers me far more in this community is the level of bad faith on display. For example, just here, the bad faith evident in your claim that you want to stop the thread because it is off-topic, rather than because the discussion is taking a turn that you don't like. The more important point I want to make in closing though is that you don't get it on some basic level. The reason to address the question of why Struts stagnated has nothing to do with making *me* happy. You have to address the question for your own benefit and that of your community. Well, of course, this whole idea that you won't answer this question because *I* am such a rude person is just a ridiculous attempt to weasel out. The question has to be addressed and my personality has absolutely nothing to do with it. PS: Lest you think I'm an arrogant jerk
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Dakota Jack wrote: Unless you had different logic books in school than I did, Craig, including does not mean excluding all else. I am here to communicate with other developers that are using STruts for their own applications and part of that is the concern about how the development process here has been failing. That is critical to people who use Struts. I am sorry if it implicates that people, like yourself, who were in charge of the failure. But, do you really think that learning something at this stage of your career is impossible when things don't work out? I would think that your great success would give you more room for criticism than that. The issue of the question being off-topic to struts-user is a red herring. Many of Craig's posts have been off-topic by the same criterion. Moreover, Craig has now said clearly that he won't address the question on struts-dev either. What is quite amazing is that he recognizes that the question is legitimate (I suppose he has to, what is illegitimate about it?) but then says that he won't answer it because I'm such a bad guy. Blatant recourse to the ad-hominem fallacy. Initially, I was going to take the next logical step in cornering this guy: If you won't answer the question when I ask it, what about if someone else asks the question, will you answer it then? And so on... But I think it's over. He has simply admitted that he won't answer the question. As for the possibility of somebody else asking the question, you can see where this leads, given the culture here: The mere fact that someone poses this taboo question will tar that person as being unworthy, and thus, will absolve Craig of any need to answer it. So the question never gets addressed. QED. Of course, everybody intuits this so the question not only doesn't get answered, it doesn't get asked in the first place, since people don't want to end up being pariahs. (I am a special case because I just don't care. :-)) Earlier in this whole discussion, people were trotting out some darwinian analogy of survival of the fittest in technologies. The problem with this darwinian analogy that technologies do not generally compete on a level playing field. Some of them have huge placement/visibility advantages. Struts, for example, even though the Struts developers themselves accept that Webwork is better technology, has more users than Webwork. In general, superior technologies do not triumph in the marketplace, but rather more or less good enough technologies that have placement advantages win out. If competition did just happen on a level playing field, and we had a darwininian situation, a project and community with this culture would go the way of the dodo bird. (Probably the mechanism would be that it would generate fairly little technically and lots of BS and ultimately suffocate in its own excrement.) I find it disturbing that a dysfunctional community can absorb one that has produced cutting edge work (Webwork in this case) and actually be mentoring them in adopting the so-called Apache Way. Without this Webwork merger, people disgusted by what they see here could at least go use Webwork, which is something technically superior with the same basic approach. But Webwork has now been swallowed by Struts in a very anti-darwinian survival of the lamest sort of mechanism. I find this quite troubling. Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/ On 3/25/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. Jonathan Revusky Craig [1] http://struts.apache.org/mail.html -- 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]
Why did Struts development stagnate?
Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Lowe wrote: Look.. You've been invited to post your thoughts about the way that apache do stuff, to a more appropiate audience than a bunch of half-wit struts users like me.. Mark, I was involved in a conversation with various people. It so happens that the conversation developed here. No matter where the conversation developed, it has gone in directions that are off topic on this list. Well, I differ with you on this. Before Mark's interruption, I posed basically the following question: If there is no basic problem with your project management practices (as you seem to claim) what were the reasons that Struts development stagnated, with Struts becoming increasingly uncompetitive with other things in its space, such as Webwork? The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. It is of interest to the Struts community, because seriously considering this question would allow you to avoid the same mistakes in the future. It would also be useful even to people like me who are managing other open source projects. It is always useful to see what other people have done right (and wrong) in terms of managing projects. This is a very complex issue that is worthy of having an open-minded exchange of views about. Now, nobody is obliged to partake in this exchange of views, I grant that. But it is utterly beyond me why somebody who doesn't want to participate in such a discussion should be trying to prevent other people from doing so. Regards, Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/ Please feel free to continue the conversation, but do it somewhere else. Craig - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. Jonathan Revusky Craig [1] http://struts.apache.org/mail.html
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. So where should such a question be asked, Craig? On rec.automotive? On alt.politics.libertarian? 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. So, cutting to the chase, if I pose the same question on struts-dev, you and the others would answer it? Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ Jonathan Revusky Craig [1] http://struts.apache.org/mail.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. So where should such a question be asked, Craig? On rec.automotive? On alt.politics.libertarian? 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. What does the mailing list description for the dev list say? Subscribe to this mailing list to communicate with other developers interested in expanding and improving the functionality supported by Struts itself. So I guess it depends on your goals :-). So, cutting to the chase, if I pose the same question on struts-dev, you and the others would answer it? It wouldn't get rejected as off topic, but your rude and obnoxious behavior has made me, speaking for myself, totally uninterested in whether you ever receive closure on it. So I'll most likely just ignore you there as well as here. Jonathan Revusky Craig PS: Lest you think I'm an arrogant jerk that deigns to answer only questions from worthy people, two notes of interest: * If you count the number of questions that I've answered on this list alone (let alone all the other lists I participate in), it's in the many thousands. * Adding you to my internal ignore list just doubled its size. This is the first time there has ever been more than one.
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
I believe the user group is for user questions about Struts; if I had to pick a place for questions like these, they really belong on the dev list so the casual user isn't loaded down with internal disputations and disagreements. --- Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig McClanahan wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Lowe wrote: Look.. You've been invited to post your thoughts about the way that apache do stuff, to a more appropiate audience than a bunch of half-wit struts users like me.. Mark, I was involved in a conversation with various people. It so happens that the conversation developed here. No matter where the conversation developed, it has gone in directions that are off topic on this list. Well, I differ with you on this. Before Mark's interruption, I posed basically the following question: If there is no basic problem with your project management practices (as you seem to claim) what were the reasons that Struts development stagnated, with Struts becoming increasingly uncompetitive with other things in its space, such as Webwork? The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. It is of interest to the Struts community, because seriously considering this question would allow you to avoid the same mistakes in the future. It would also be useful even to people like me who are managing other open source projects. It is always useful to see what other people have done right (and wrong) in terms of managing projects. This is a very complex issue that is worthy of having an open-minded exchange of views about. Now, nobody is obliged to partake in this exchange of views, I grant that. But it is utterly beyond me why somebody who doesn't want to participate in such a discussion should be trying to prevent other people from doing so. Regards, Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker group blog, http://freemarker.blogspot.com/ Please feel free to continue the conversation, but do it somewhere else. Craig - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why did Struts development stagnate?
Unless you had different logic books in school than I did, Craig, including does not mean excluding all else. I am here to communicate with other developers that are using STruts for their own applications and part of that is the concern about how the development process here has been failing. That is critical to people who use Struts. I am sorry if it implicates that people, like yourself, who were in charge of the failure. But, do you really think that learning something at this stage of your career is impossible when things don't work out? I would think that your great success would give you more room for criticism than that. On 3/25/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/25/06, Jonathan Revusky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, at the very least, broadly on-topic. This interpretation is wildly out of sync with the formal description of this mailing list's purpose[1], quoted below: Subscribe to this list to communicate with other developers that are using Struts for their own applications, including questions about the installation of Struts, and the usage of particular Struts features. Jonathan Revusky Craig [1] http://struts.apache.org/mail.html -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~
