Ted Husted on 02/12/05 04:29, wrote:
We have two because JSF is fundamentally incompatible with action-orientated frameworks. (As stated on the Struts home page.) But, that will not be the case for Ti. We plan to create a clear and relatively painless migration path, so that investments in skill sets and working code will be retained. (Including our own.)
There is nothing preventing Struts X.x offering both 'incompatible' frameworks. Struts 1.x, the 'action'-based framework and other 'component'-based frameworks are composed of perhaps code that is or could be 75% 'action' or 'component'-agnostic.
Why burn bridges? It would be better to incorporate to cut down the central component of the struts action and move all agnostic material to the side, pretty much as Shale is now.
At that point Struts could then incorporate a 'component'-based framework module to match the action-based framework.
Don't forget, 'Struts' means 'A structural element used to brace or strengthen a framework [...]' not 'foundation stone'.
Adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
