--- "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > > Presuming a positive vote from the committers, we'd have to make a > formal > > > proposal to the ASF Board (like the Ant, Maven, ... communities did, > so we > > can > > > use their proposals as a sample) and get it accepted. Included in > the > > proposal > > > would be things like who the PMC members would be, and who we'd > suggest as > > the > > > PMC chairperson (because this person becomes an ASF officer, it has > to be > > > appointed by the board). > > > > > > The largest issue around preparing the proposal is likely to be a > > definition of > > > what the scope of the project will be. > > > > We could dodge the bullet and just follow Cocoon precedent: define the > > > scope of Apache Struts to be Apache Struts :) > > > > So, do we invite the non-Java implementations of the same concept in, or > do we > say "nah, we're a Java project?" I'm not personally much interested in > the non > Java solutions, but a cross-language framework would be somewhat > unusual.
I'm also not interested in non-Java Struts implementations. Any other implementation could only share struts-config.xml and none of our current code. There would be 2 separate and largely independent group of developers so I don't see the need to include them in Struts. David > > Craig > > > > > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2003/board_minutes_2003_01_22.txt > > > > Otherwise, any language we come up with is sure to overlap with other > > Apache offerings, and we end up having to create some type of > frameworks > > project, along the lines of the Database or Web Services projects. > > > > > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2002/board_minutes_2002_07_17.txt > > > > > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2003/board_minutes_2003_01_22.txt > > > > If we did decide to do something, I'm not opposed to either course. > > > > The former would be less work, but the latter might have greater long > > term benefits. In the latter case, I suppose we'd ask Tapestry and > > Turbine if they wanted to join us as frameworks.apache.org (or > whatever). > > > > I looked over the Board status reports for db and webservices, but > it's > > hard to tell whether these new umbrellas are working any better than > > Jakarta. If anyone is involved with the communities, and has something > > > to share, please do. > > > > On balance, I would lean toward the position that the Struts community > > > is large and robust enough to justify its own TLP, and see if the > Board > > agrees. > > > > One thing I would like to bring up in the context of a TLP Struts is > the > > idea of also hosting a php implementation of Struts. Several people > have > > been trying to do this (google struts php). Since php is also an > Apache > > product, it would be a natural thing for a top-level ASF Struts > project > > do to. A framework similar to Struts, Maverick, already has a php > > implementation, which proves it can be done. > > > > Of course, there is also the matter of JSR 223 > > <http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=223>. > > > > There is *alot* of interest in using MVC in php-land, and a Struts > > implementation could help coalesce that interest into a stable > community. > > > > -Ted. > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
